Graham Gooch - Best ever opening batsmen against genuine pace bowling?

[Harsh Thakor]

I have been trying to evaluate in order of merit the best opening batsmen of all time against genuine pace bowling in test cricket..This list does not evaluate overall merit of opening batsmen but only performances against genuine pace bowling attacks.

Best opening batsmen against genuine pace in order of merit in test matches.

1.Graham Gooch

Performed phenomenally well against the great foursome of Andy Roberts,Michael Holding,Colin Croft and Joel Garner in 1981 in the Carribean scoring centuries on the fastest pitches at Barbados and Kingston..His 153 at Sabina park was an all-time classic being one of the best displays of counter-attack against lethal pace.Averaged over 57 in that series.Also a marvel at Leeds when scoring 154 in 1991 in the worst of batting conditions blending the skill of a surgeon. with the courage of a soldier .Also prolific in Australia in 1990-91 averaging over 53 and versus Australia at home averaging over 56. in 1993 and over 46 in 1985.Averaged over 45 against great Calypso pace in series in West Indies in 1986 while averaged over 48 versus Pakistan with the great Wasim and Waqar in home series in 1992. Although not a champion technically he had great mastery in strokeplay displaying the skill and organization of an architect and the ferocity of a lion.Could despatch the best deliveries of Marshall,Holding,Wasim or Waqar with utmost contempt.Even Gavaskar has been overshadowed by Gooch against the great West Indian bowling attack.He has overshadowed any other opener against the best attacks in the Carribean.


2.Sunil Gavaskar/Len Hutton

Gavaskar and Hutton were almost carbon copy's of each other taking technical skill to it's highest zenith.Both were basically defensive and built an innings like an architect designing a building.Gavaskar faced the best bowlers ever like Roberts,Holding,Marshal,Lillee,Botham,Hadle,Wilis and Thomson.Hutton faced less greats but displayed phenomenal consistency against Lindwall and Miller in 2 series .Hutton like Gavaskar was also prolific in the Caribbean like in 1954.Gavaskar could well have been at no 1 but was relegated as his best averages in series v West Indies were against the mediocre bowling attacks.In 1983-84 he had some great scores but was relatively inconsistent against the great Carribean foursome.No doubt Gavaskar batted like a champion against Roberts and Holding in 1975-76, Imran and Sarafraz in 1978-79 and against Imran in 1979-80 at home but we missed seing Gavaskar at his best aginst Lillee in 1978 in Australia because of Packer Cricket or against the great Carribean ace battery in 1978-79 in India.


4.Barry Richards/Jack Hobbs

Potentially Barry have been at no 1 but did not play sufficient International cricket.In Packer cricket toyed with the likes of Denis Lillee and co when scoring 207 in 1977-78 and 125 n.o for rest of the world in 1978 supertest final.Only Viv Richards displayed equal attacking agression.Hobbs did not face the great speedsters but neverthlesss negotiated some of the finest bowlers.On wet or bad pitches he was the greatest of all openers and maybe batsmen.Had he played in 1970=s r 80's Hobbs could wel have even overshadowed Gavaskar and Gooch.


6.Saed Anwar

Few left -handed batsmen could launch such a blistering attack on opponents as Anwar could .His bating blended the attacking instinct of a tiger with the poetic grace of a sculptor.At his best against great South African bowling in 1997-98 in South Africa and in Australia in 1999-2000.Exhibited supremacy in batting skill amongst openers of his generations .


7.Hanif Mohammad

Technically simply a giant.Arguably the most complete of all opening batsmen aggregating 628 run sin 1957-58 in the Carribean incliuding a triple hundred.Rated low down because he did not face the likes of Marshal,Lillee or Holding.


8.Geoff Boycott

Often resembled a boulder resisting a gale.Could be boring but was often the most difficult batsmen to dislodge.Boycott posessed the grammar of an English professor and concentration of a Buddhist monk.Few batsmen posesed as much clinical precision as Boycott.At his best in West Indies in 1981 when averaging over 44 ,at home against the same team a season earlier in 1980 averaging over 40 and in Australia in 1979-80.Holding found Geoff one of the hardest batsmen to ever dislodge .His 99 n.o in Perth in 1979-80 was truly a revelation.


9.Gordon Greenidge

On his day the equal of Barry Richards.Few batsmen moulded pugnacity and solidity so perfectly.In full flow Greenidge looked like a galleon in full sail.He combined the attacking agression of an army battalion wit the technical skill of a surgeon.Rated low because he was not relatively succesful on tours of Australia.Neverthless played the Aussie attack superbly in 1984 at home and consistently in 1988-89 in Australia.His 226 at Barbados against a top class Aussie attack proved that on his day he could join any great opening batsmen.


10.Virendra Sehwag

In terms of raw talent perhaps Barry Richard's equal.Not at his best on the fast,bouncy surfaces.However some of his best innings were classics in Australia and South Africa when he made the impact of a bulldozer on a cricket field.Inspite of restricted footwork his devastating reflexes,power and timing would have taken the micky out of the quickest paceman on his day.


11.Arthur Morris

The greatest of match-winners who we did not see against the greatest paceman.


12.Gen Turner

Did not prove himself sufficiently against great paceman but blended agression and grammar as few players ever did.Scored a phenomenal aggregate of over 600 runs in 4 tests in West Indies including scores of 259 and 223 in 1972 .Glen could resist great attacks with the resilience of a boulder and the technical skill of an architect.


13.Mark Taylor

Could be almost impossible to dislodge at his best with a huge array of strokes.Brilliantly negotiated the short,rising ball.Curtly Ambrose and Wasim Akram thought he was one of the hardest batsmen to dislodge.


14.Matthew Hayden

A master batsmen but not tested as much as other greats before.Few openers were more devastating in attack or could turn the complexion of a match more.Played relatively easier pace than Gavaskar,Boycott or Gooch.


15.Graeme Smith

Technically sound with great time in executing stroke.A graet natch-winner.


16.Demond Haynes

Few batsmen looked so flowing when batting.Often his bating reminded you of a lyric playing.His deftest touches could send the ball crashing over the ropes.Amassed a huge aggregate against Aussie bowling attacks in 1984 at home and in 1988-89 down under when he set a record aggregate for a West Indian batsmen for a series in Australia.

 

[Justcrazy]

Barry Richards case is really unfortunate , what a talent the cricket world missed.

 

[Tusker]

Hobbs did not face the great speedsters but neverthlesss negotiated some of the finest bowlers

Like who ? Which fast bowler he faced ranks amongst top 10 bowlers of all time ?

And you just proclaim that he would be as good as Sunny had he played in the 80s ... have you seen (different from whats written ) his batting technique ?

11.Arthur Morris The greatest of match-winners who we did not see against the greatest paceman.

Thank god for small mercies in realizing that he never faced any great fast bowlers ... but I see that you have not let that fact get in your way and proceeded to randomly place him at 11 above likes of Hayden , Smith

 

[Thivagar]

[MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION]

 

[Last Monetarist]

Gooch was pretty good against the West Indies fearsome quartet: averaging almost 45 across more than 50 innings is no mean feat. However, his record in Australia is pretty ordinary with only one hundred during 33 innings across 4 tours which puts paid to the notion of him being the best ever opener against pace bowling.

He had an almighty tumble playing Rodney Hogg on his first tour in 78-79 when Lillee and Thomson were away playing World Series cricket. On his second tour in 79-80 after the Packer rebels had been invited back he had one decent score when he was run out for 99 in the final test, but Lillee and Geoff Dymock gave him problems throughout that series. Gooch then didn't tour Australia for 10 years till 90-91, when arguably he was a better batsman in his late thirties then he'd been at any other stage of his career. Nonetheless, he only had one great test match in Adelaide where his fourth innings hundred saved the match. His final tour in 94-95 was nothing to write home about, when he was basically selected alongside Mike Gatting to counter Warne - unsuccessfully, of course - in the middle order.

There's simply no comparison with Sunil Gavaskar. I'd argue Boycott, who despite accusations of running away from Lillee and Thomson in 74-75, was also better against genuine pace. Barry Richards from all accounts in Australia, England and South Africa was also on another level.

 

[IcedEarth]

Greenidge may be.

If Viv have opened, then he would take the crown.

 

[Hitman]

Sunny Gavaskar.

 

[Junaids]

Best I ever saw was Bruce Laird. Significantly better than Gooch or Gavaskar against sustained pace.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Gooch was pretty good against the West Indies fearsome quartet: averaging almost 45 across more than 50 innings is no mean feat. However, his record in Australia is pretty ordinary with only one hundred during 33 innings across 4 tours which puts paid to the notion of him being the best ever opener against pace bowling.

He had an almighty tumble playing Rodney Hogg on his first tour in 78-79 when Lillee and Thomson were away playing World Series cricket. On his second tour in 79-80 after the Packer rebels had been invited back he had one decent score when he was run out for 99 in the final test, but Lillee and Geoff Dymock gave him problems throughout that series. Gooch then didn't tour Australia for 10 years till 90-91, when arguably he was a better batsman in his late thirties then he'd been at any other stage of his career. Nonetheless, he only had one great test match in Adelaide where his fourth innings hundred saved the match. His final tour in 94-95 was nothing to write home about, when he was basically selected alongside Mike Gatting to counter Warne - unsuccessfully, of course - in the middle order.

There's simply no comparison with Sunil Gavaskar. I'd argue Boycott, who despite accusations of running away from Lillee and Thomson in 74-75, was also better against genuine pace. Barry Richards from all accounts in Australia, England and South Africa was also on another level.

what about his 197 v Australia in 1985 in England against Lawson and Mcdermott?Remember Gavaskar was also never prolific against Lillee in 1980-81 and benefited from facing lesser bowlers in 1977-8 and 1985-86.The greatest test was aginst the great Carribean foursome agisnt whom Goch overshadowed everyone.Remember Gavaskar's bset was not against the great West Indies attack but against the 2nd string bowlers.Gooch's best was against the very best of the Calypsos attack-best pace attack ever.Bary,Sunio or Geoff have not equalled Gooch's centuries at Barbados,Kingston and Leeds.Remember Australai apart from pace also contained fast-medium swing to which Gooch was vulnerable like Terry Alderman or Kapil Dev.Against fast-medium swing Gavaskar and Boycott wee beter coping better against the moving ball.However Gooch relished pace and bounce more being prolific on the fastest wickets.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Best I ever saw was Bruce Laird. Significantly better than Gooch or Gavaskar against sustained pace.

How would you compare Boycott,Gooch and Gavaskar against sustained pace?Was Gavaskar beter than the Chappell brothers against pure pace?What do you feel about the order in my list?

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Like who ? Which fast bowler he faced ranks amongst top 10 bowlers of all time ?

And you just proclaim that he would be as good as Sunny had he played in the 80s ... have you seen (different from whats written ) his batting technique ?






Thank god for small mercies in realizing that he never faced any great fast bowlers ... but I see that you have not let that fact get in your way and proceeded to randomly place him at 11 above likes of Hayden , Smith

Jack Hobbs payed on some of the most unplayable,and treacherous wickets.He even overshadowed Bradman on wet pitches.Do watch some youtube recordings.Arthur Morris too tackled some treacherous pitches with success.I adjusted Sehwag because of great natural ability and some great innings on bad wickets.I can hardly imagine Hobbs or Morris being overshadowed by the likes of Hayden,Tayor and Smith or maybe Greenidge.
We have to respect history and if you ***** technique art and style Hoos was an absolute master.Maybe I missed Victor Trumper but his was a very different age.Although of lesser speed Hobbs did face some great bowlers.

 

[Junaids]

How would you compare Boycott,Gooch and Gavaskar against sustained pace?Was Gavaskar beter than the Chappell brothers against pure pace?What do you feel about the order in my list?

Gooch was very good at batting against seam and swing delivered in the range up to 145.

Gavaskar was terrific against short express pace with no swing or seam in between. He just ducked and waited for a loose ball, and the one series when there weren't any loose balls - 82-83 - he couldn't score like Amarnath.

Ian Chappell and Bruce Laird were the best because they attacked pace relentlessly. Greg Chappell was a better all-round batsman, certainly by the time Packer arrived, but he couldn't dominate the best pacemen like his brother had a few years earlier.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Gooch was very good at batting against seam and swing delivered in the range up to 145.

Gavaskar was terrific against short express pace with no swing or seam in between. He just ducked and waited for a loose ball, and the one series when there weren't any loose balls - 82-83 - he couldn't score like Amarnath.

Ian Chappell and Bruce Laird were the best because they attacked pace relentlessly. Greg Chappell was a better all-round batsman, certainly by the time Packer arrived, but he couldn't dominate the best pacemen like his brother had a few years earlier.

Then what about Gooch's great inings against Croft ,Garner,Holding and Roberts at Kingston and Barbados in 1981and against Marshall and Ambrose at Leeds in 1991?Averaged 57.44 agisnt the greatset attck in 1981 in the Carribean.154 at Leeds rated one of the best ever knocks.Remember Gavaskar's bset was not against the great West Indies attack but against the 2nd string bowlers.Gooch's best was against the very best of the Calypsos attack-best pace attack ever.Bary,Sunio or Geoff have not equalled Gooch's centuries at Barbados,Kingston and Leeds.Remember Australai apart from pace also contained fast-medium swing to which Gooch was vulnerable like Terry Alderman or Kapil Dev.Against fast-medium swing Gavaskar and Boycott wee better coping better against the moving ball.However Gooch relished pace and bounce more being prolific on the fastest wickets.

 

[Junaids]

Then what about Gooch's great inings against Croft ,Garner,Holding and Roberts at Kingston and Barbados in 1981and against Marshall and Ambrose at Leeds in 1991?Averaged 57.44 agisnt the greatset attck in 1981 in the Carribean.154 at Leeds rated one of the best ever knocks.Remember Gavaskar's bset was not against the great West Indies attack but against the 2nd string bowlers.Gooch's best was against the very best of the Calypsos attack-best pace attack ever.Bary,Sunio or Geoff have not equalled Gooch's centuries at Barbados,Kingston and Leeds.Remember Australai apart from pace also contained fast-medium swing to which Gooch was vulnerable like Terry Alderman or Kapil Dev.Against fast-medium swing Gavaskar and Boycott wee better coping better against the moving ball.However Gooch relished pace and bounce more being prolific on the fastest wickets.

Very good points.

But Gooch's 154 at Leeds in 1991 has been grossly over-rated since the day it happened.

It was not a great West Indies pace attack. The best bowler, Ian Bishop, was absent with stress fractures of the back. Ambrose and Patterson and Walsh couldn't swing the ball - and it was a swingers' match.

Ambrose took wickets through his height and length. Marshall got them with swing, but he was about to retire and his pace was now in the low-130's.

Steve Watkin, Phil De Freitas and Derek Pringle really showed that it was a medium paced swing match. Walsh and Patterson were like fish out of water on a slow, spongy wicket.

Gooch scored his 154 by just keeping his head and batting sensibly while his team-mates got frustrated with Ambrose's stifling length and kept chasing wide balls and edging them to Dujon.

 

[Last Monetarist]

what about his 197 v Australia in 1985 in England against Lawson and Mcdermott?Remember Gavaskar was also never prolific against Lillee in 1980-81 and benefited from facing lesser bowlers in 1977-8 and 1985-86.The greatest test was aginst the great Carribean foursome agisnt whom Goch overshadowed everyone.Remember Gavaskar's bset was not against the great West Indies attack but against the 2nd string bowlers.Gooch's best was against the very best of the Calypsos attack-best pace attack ever.Bary,Sunio or Geoff have not equalled Gooch's centuries at Barbados,Kingston and Leeds.Remember Australai apart from pace also contained fast-medium swing to which Gooch was vulnerable like Terry Alderman or Kapil Dev.Against fast-medium swing Gavaskar and Boycott wee beter coping better against the moving ball.However Gooch relished pace and bounce more being prolific on the fastest wickets.

English wickets in the mid-1980s were sluggish and slow and that 196 on a typical Oval featherbed came at the fag end of a demoralizing summer for the Australians in 1985. Gooch struggled against Hogg in 78-79, against Lillee in 79-80, and kept getting out to Bruce Reid who was consistently bowling around 88-90 mph in 90-91. Don't get me wrong, I believe that Gooch was extremely good against pace bowling but his failure in Australia can't be glossed away to anoint him as the best ever opener against pace bowling.

Gavaskar scored centuries against Roberts, Holding and Julien in 1976; Roberts, Holding, Marshall and Garner in 1983; McDermott, Hughes and Reid in 1986; and carried his bat against a rampaging Imran at his peak on a sporting wicket (yes, a misnomer in itself) in Faisalabad in 1983. You are severely underrating him.

I'd grant you Gooch over Boycott comparing their respective performances against the West Indies though, although it must be said that Boycott scored runs against Peter Pollock, Wes Hall, Andy Roberts, Michael Holding, Joel Garner, Dennis Lillee, Graham McKenzie at various times of his career. Don't have sufficient objective data to decide for Barry Richards one way or another, but the greatest quick bowlers in both county cricket and shield cricket of the age consistently testified about the frightening amount of time that Barry had when playing the quickest bowlers.

 

[Tusker]

Jack Hobbs payed on some of the most unplayable,and treacherous wickets.He even overshadowed Bradman on wet pitches.Do watch some youtube recordings.Arthur Morris too tackled some treacherous pitches with success.I adjusted Sehwag because of great natural ability and some great innings on bad wickets.I can hardly imagine Hobbs or Morris being overshadowed by the likes of Hayden,Tayor and Smith or maybe Greenidge.
We have to respect history and if you ***** technique art and style Hoos was an absolute master.Maybe I missed Victor Trumper but his was a very different age.Although of lesser speed Hobbs did face some great bowlers.

Please tell me in pure cricketing terms how you have arrived at Jack Hobbs being a "Master" . From my understanding of batting technique his technique will only work against very ordinary bowlers.

Please speak in terms of Pure batting technique alone from the videos below. Iam not interested in re-hashing all that is written in history books. And you cant even recall the names of bowlers he faced can you? Have to rely on cricinfo to find that out. Right ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoORpp1AdSk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rrx2nrgev4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4q2aFWqs8fo

 

[Tusker]

Gooch was very good at batting against seam and swing delivered in the range up to 145.

There is no real evidence that any of the WI bowlers of that time bowled at that speed. All we have is third party reports that claim that these guys were terrifying or some such adjective. The main reason for their standing is the inability of batsmen to handle pace in the 130K range ... batsmen were yet to adapt to that level. It takes time. This is the evolution process.

 

[Tusker]

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

here is a better clip of Hobbs batting. So I want to know how someone with that kind of technique can last more than an over against Express pace bowlers that we see in modern era bowling consistently above 140K.

He wont last more than 2-3 overs and will be struggling to put bat on ball. I would appreciate if you took time to explain that in pure technical terms and nothing else. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkHWtsrt9Sk

 

[Robert]

what about his 197 v Australia in 1985 in England against Lawson and Mcdermott?Remember Gavaskar was also never prolific against Lillee in 1980-81 and benefited from facing lesser bowlers in 1977-8 and 1985-86.The greatest test was aginst the great Carribean foursome agisnt whom Goch overshadowed everyone.Remember Gavaskar's bset was not against the great West Indies attack but against the 2nd string bowlers.Gooch's best was against the very best of the Calypsos attack-best pace attack ever.Bary,Sunio or Geoff have not equalled Gooch's centuries at Barbados,Kingston and Leeds.Remember Australai apart from pace also contained fast-medium swing to which Gooch was vulnerable like Terry Alderman or Kapil Dev.Against fast-medium swing Gavaskar and Boycott wee beter coping better against the moving ball.However Gooch relished pace and bounce more being prolific on the fastest wickets.

Lawson was suffering from a viral infection that summer and was down on pace. McDermott was a tyro at the time, and the pitches were slow all summer.

I would argue that the bat-carrying against WI was significant because the wicket had uneven bounce of a type you never see any more, all the Windian quicks were making it shoot and lift at high pace, and Marshall was making it go sideways at will too.

Lillee sorted a lot of top batters out, which was why he is rated so highly.

Gooch was a curious man who lost confidence at times - he made himself unavailable to face Pakistan in 1987. Then he came back for the MCC Bicentenary match and scored a century against Imran, Walsh, Kapil and Qadir!

But I know that West Indian sages rate Gooch as one of the best to face their boys.

 

[street cricketer]

Lawson was suffering from a viral infection that summer and was down on pace. McDermott was a tyro at the time, and the pitches were slow all summer.

I would argue that the bat-carrying against WI was significant because the wicket had uneven bounce of a type you never see any more, all the Windian quicks were making it shoot and lift at high pace, and Marshall was making it go sideways at will too.

Lillee sorted a lot of top batters out, which was why he is rated so highly.

Gooch was a curious man who lost confidence at times - he made himself unavailable to face Pakistan in 1987. Then he came back for the MCC Bicentenary match and scored a century against Imran, Walsh, Kapil and Qadir!

But I know that West Indian sages rate Gooch as one of the best to face their boys.

Welcome back

 

[Junaids]

Lawson was suffering from a viral infection that summer and was down on pace. McDermott was a tyro at the time, and the pitches were slow all summer.

I would argue that the bat-carrying against WI was significant because the wicket had uneven bounce of a type you never see any more, all the Windian quicks were making it shoot and lift at high pace, and Marshall was making it go sideways at will too.

Lillee sorted a lot of top batters out, which was why he is rated so highly.

Gooch was a curious man who lost confidence at times - he made himself unavailable to face Pakistan in 1987. Then he came back for the MCC Bicentenary match and scored a century against Imran, Walsh, Kapil and Qadir!

But I know that West Indian sages rate Gooch as one of the best to face their boys.

I've been away from home for the last couple of weeks, and can honestly say I've missed you more than my own family!

Goochie was a strange cove.

So talented, so correct, but with very brittle self-confidence and a tendency to become very intense and to brood.

The OP was right: he could be superb against pace.

 

[Sufghan]

Had Great Graham Gooch not been banned for 3 years due to Rebel Tour to aparthied South Africa, he would have ended up getting 11000+ Test Runs, ahead of Alan Border by miles. Nobody can forget his 135 in 4th Teat against a very strong Pakistan Test Team in 1992 Test Series.

 

[cricketpatzer]

Anyone who thinks Gooch was better than Gavaskar is analytically challenged. Start your analysis with their averages, next proceed to the teams they played with etc.

 

[Junaids]

There is no real evidence that any of the WI bowlers of that time bowled at that speed. All we have is third party reports that claim that these guys were terrifying or some such adjective. The main reason for their standing is the inability of batsmen to handle pace in the 130K range ... batsmen were yet to adapt to that level. It takes time. This is the evolution process.

Like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION], I watched the 76, 80, 84 and 88 West Indians in England. I reckon this was what they bowled:

1976
Roberts 135-155, average 145
Holding 145-160, average 147
Daniel 135-145, average 137
Julian 125-130, average 127

1980
Roberts 135-150, average 140
Holding 140-150, average 143
Garner 135-143, average 140
Croft 135-145, average 140

1984
Roberts 135-145, average 138
Garner 135-143, average 140
Holding 135-145, average 140
Marshall 140-155, average 147

1988
Ambrose 140-145, average 143
Marshall 135-145, average 140

In 1986 in the West Indies, by common consensus Patrick Patterson was bowling in the 150s at Sabina Park.

The 1989 Aussies faced pace in the form of Graham Dilley (low 140s) and Paul Jarvis (mid 140s). But Lancashire fielded BOTH Wasim Akram AND Patrick Patterson against them, and Bobby Simpson famously said that Wasim Akram was 5 mph faster than any Englishman that summer, but Patterson was another 10 mph faster than that.

Which makes me think that, like in 84-85 at Melbourne, Wasim Akram operated around 150K against the Aussies in that match and Patterson was in the mid-160's.

 

[cricketpatzer]

I have been trying to evaluate in order of merit the best opening batsmen of all time against genuine pace bowling in test cricket..This list does not evaluate overall merit of opening batsmen but only performances against genuine pace bowling attacks.

Best opening batsmen against genuine pace in order of merit in test matches.

1.Graham Gooch

Performed phenomenally well against the great foursome of Andy Roberts,Michael Holding,Colin Croft and Joel Garner in 1981 in the Carribean scoring centuries on the fastest pitches at Barbados and Kingston..His 153 at Sabina park was an all-time classic being one of the best displays of counter-attack against lethal pace.Averaged over 57 in that series.Also a marvel at Leeds when scoring 154 in 1991 in the worst of batting conditions blending the skill of a surgeon. with the courage of a soldier .Also prolific in Australia in 1990-91 averaging over 53 and versus Australia at home averaging over 56. in 1993 and over 46 in 1985.Averaged over 45 against great Calypso pace in series in West Indies in 1986 while averaged over 48 versus Pakistan with the great Wasim and Waqar in home series in 1992. Although not a champion technically he had great mastery in strokeplay displaying the skill and organization of an architect and the ferocity of a lion.Could despatch the best deliveries of Marshall,Holding,Wasim or Waqar with utmost contempt. <b>Even Gavaskar has been overshadowed by Gooch against the great West Indian bowling attack.</b>

Why, oh why would you even compare Gavaskar with his 61 average against WI and 9 centuries in 21 Tests (after excluding the Packer 78/79 season) to Gooch with his 44.8 average against WI and 5 centuries in 26 Tests???

Gooch was a great player, but just was not anywhere close to Gavaskar. To think otherwise is simply absurd.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

Why, oh why would you even compare Gavaskar with his 61 average against WI and 9 centuries in 21 Tests (after excluding the Packer 78/79 season) to Gooch with his 44.8 average against WI and 5 centuries in 26 Tests???

Gooch was a great player, but just was not anywhere close to Gavaskar. To think otherwise is simply absurd.

Please asess Gavaskar's averages in 1983-84 in 11 tests against West Indies top attack where he was unbeaten when scoring 136 at Guyana and 236 at Madras and failed in 18 out of 21 innings.Gavaskar's best against Calypsos was 774 runs at 154.8 in 1971 in West Indies and 732 runs at 91.5 in India in 1978-79 against weaker bowling.Thus he scored 8 centuries against the relatively weaker attacks without Holding,marshal Roberts etc.In 1975-76 he averaged 55.71 with 2 centuries ,but remember it was against Roberts and Holding in the 2nd and only Holding in the 3rd.In that light Gooch did better averaging 57.44 with an aggregate of 460 runs in the Carribean against all the 4 great speedsters.Gavaskar has not equaled Gooch's masterly 154 on a Leeds pitch with uneven bounce in 1991 against the Calypsos in the most adverse of situations.Calculate Gooch and Gavaskar's performances against the great West Indies pace attack.Only 5 of Gavaskar's 13centuries v the Calypsos were scored against a speedster who was genuinely quick and he averaged less than 50.Even If Sunny statistically edged Gooch against pure pace never forget that Gooch dominated bowling more and was not basically defensive.Overall ,definitely Gavaskar was better.I will never deny that.Gooch may not be categorzied with Gavaskar technically or statistically and was not as proficient against swing and spin as Gavaskar.However on a fast pitch against pure pace at his best I feel Gooch overshadowed Sunny.Juts ***** the wickets Gooch scored his best centuries against West Indies.Barbados,Kingston and Leeds were more testing than Trinidad,Guyana ,Delhi and Madras.

 

[Tusker]

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

here is a better clip of Hobbs batting. So I want to know how someone with that kind of technique can last more than an over against Express pace bowlers that we see in modern era bowling consistently above 140K.

He wont last more than 2-3 overs and will be struggling to put bat on ball. I would appreciate if you took time to explain that in pure technical terms and nothing else. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkHWtsrt9Sk

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

No response to this post ?

 

[Tusker]

Like [MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION], I watched the 76, 80, 84 and 88 West Indians in England. I reckon this was what they bowled:

1976
Roberts 135-155, average 145
Holding 145-160, average 147
Daniel 135-145, average 137
Julian 125-130, average 127

1980
Roberts 135-150, average 140
Holding 140-150, average 143
Garner 135-143, average 140
Croft 135-145, average 140

1984
Roberts 135-145, average 138
Garner 135-143, average 140
Holding 135-145, average 140
Marshall 140-155, average 147

1988
Ambrose 140-145, average 143
Marshall 135-145, average 140

In 1986 in the West Indies, by common consensus Patrick Patterson was bowling in the 150s at Sabina Park.

The 1989 Aussies faced pace in the form of Graham Dilley (low 140s) and Paul Jarvis (mid 140s). But Lancashire fielded BOTH Wasim Akram AND Patrick Patterson against them, and Bobby Simpson famously said that Wasim Akram was 5 mph faster than any Englishman that summer, but Patterson was another 10 mph faster than that.

Which makes me think that, like in 84-85 at Melbourne, Wasim Akram operated around 150K against the Aussies in that match and Patterson was in the mid-160's.

Speaking purely from a scientific perspective there is absolutely no way a human being can estimate pace of a fast bowler ( Or spinner) .

 

[MMHS]

Lawson was suffering from a viral infection that summer and was down on pace. McDermott was a tyro at the time, and the pitches were slow all summer.

I would argue that the bat-carrying against WI was significant because the wicket had uneven bounce of a type you never see any more, all the Windian quicks were making it shoot and lift at high pace, and Marshall was making it go sideways at will too.

Lillee sorted a lot of top batters out, which was why he is rated so highly.

Gooch was a curious man who lost confidence at times - he made himself unavailable to face Pakistan in 1987. Then he came back for the MCC Bicentenary match and scored a century against Imran, Walsh, Kapil and Qadir!

But I know that West Indian sages rate Gooch as one of the best to face their boys.

Welcome back old man of PP (like me). Great to have you back again. I watched the Leeds innings almost by ball - it can't be better than that.

 

[cricketpatzer]

Please asess Gavaskar's averages in 1983-84 in 11 tests against West Indies top attack where he was unbeaten when scoring 136 at Guyana and 236 at Madras and failed in 18 out of 21 innings.Gavaskar's best against Calypsos was 774 runs at 154.8 in 1971 in West Indies and 732 runs at 91.5 in India in 1978-79 against weaker bowling.Thus he scored 8 centuries against the relatively weaker attacks without Holding,marshal Roberts etc.In 1975-76 he averaged 55.71 with 2 centuries ,but remember it was against Roberts and Holding in the 2nd and only Holding in the 3rd.In that light Gooch did better averaging 57.44 with an aggregate of 460 runs in the Carribean against all the 4 great speedsters.Gavaskar has not equaled Gooch's masterly 154 on a Leeds pitch with uneven bounce in 1991 against the Calypsos in the most adverse of situations.Calculate Gooch and Gavaskar's performances against the great West Indies pace attack.Only 5 of Gavaskar's 13centuries v the Calypsos were scored against a speedster who was genuinely quick and he averaged less than 50.Even If Sunny statistically edged Gooch against pure pace never forget that Gooch dominated bowling more and was not basically defensive.Overall ,definitely Gavaskar was better.I will never deny that.Gooch may not be categorzied with Gavaskar technically or statistically and was not as proficient against swing and spin as Gavaskar.However on a fast pitch against pure pace at his best I feel Gooch overshadowed Sunny.Juts ***** the wickets Gooch scored his best centuries against West Indies.Barbados,Kingston and Leeds were more testing than Trinidad,Guyana ,Delhi and Madras.

1. You basically seem to want to compare series when Gavaskar did badly to series when Gooch did well.

2. Gavaskar is 4 years older than Gooch, so naturally you would expect them to play somewhat different bowlers. Know someone who accomplished nothing against the Holding and Garner? Donald Bradman!

3. "Please asess Gavaskar's averages in 1983-84" Oh, you mean the years when the WI speedsters were at their very best and Gooch went away to SA leaving his country to be whitewashed 5-0 at home?

4. "Gavaskar has not equaled Gooch's masterly 154 on a Leeds pitch with uneven bounce in 1991 against the Calypsos in the most adverse of situations." Gavaskar exceeded that innings with his 220 that was part of India's series win. Anyway, comparison between two players cannot be based on a single innings they played.

5. "Even If Sunny statistically edged Gooch against pure pace never forget that Gooch dominated bowling more and was not basically defensive". Gavaskar being "defensive" is what his country needed when the other batsmen in his team were suspect against pace. That adds to rather than subtracts from his accomplishments. Being able to play long in Test matches is a good thing.

5. "Only 5 of Gavaskar's 13centuries v the Calypsos were scored against a speedster who was genuinely quick". So Gavaskar scored 5 centuries against "genuinely quick" WI bowlers. Know how many Tests he needed to score that? 15. Know how many Tests Gooch needed to score his 5 centuries against the WI? 26!

So basically even using your filters, Gavaskar scored centuries against WI at 26/15 = 1.73X the rate compared to Gooch. There is simply no comparison between Gavaskar and Gooch.

 

[Tusker]

Welcome back old man of PP (like me). Great to have you back again. I watched the Leeds innings almost by ball - it can't be better than that.

Just watched the extended highlights of that innings and I don't see whats so special about it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extraordinary about that innings ... looks great because of the ordinary batting from the rest of the English players. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63557.html

Lawson was suffering from a viral infection that summer and was down on pace. McDermott was a tyro at the time, and the pitches were slow all summer.

I would argue that the bat-carrying against WI was significant because the wicket had uneven bounce of a type you never see any more, all the Windian quicks were making it shoot and lift at high pace, and Marshall was making it go sideways at will too.

Lillee sorted a lot of top batters out, which was why he is rated so highly.

Gooch was a curious man who lost confidence at times - he made himself unavailable to face Pakistan in 1987. Then he came back for the MCC Bicentenary match and scored a century against Imran, Walsh, Kapil and Qadir!

But I know that West Indian sages rate Gooch as one of the best to face their boys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extra ordinary about the pitch ... you get them all the time even now. As I said its the batting at the other end that made Gooch's inngs stand out. Otherwise no team lasts that long on a bad pitch.

 

[Junaids]

Speaking purely from a scientific perspective there is absolutely no way a human being can estimate pace of a fast bowler ( Or spinner) .

Now, I disagree totally here. And I do so as someone who thoroughly enjoys your posts and your challenges.

I can't really argue with your Jack Hobbs comments - I obviously never saw him play and, like you, I find the film footage singularly unimpressive.

But over the last 40 years I have seen batsmen come and go. The likes of Gavaskar, Gooch and Boycott had much better footwork and defensive technique than almost all modern players, and I saw how they avoided getting hit or even fencing at the ball. In contrast, since I started writing this reply I've seen Ross Taylor hit on the body twice in quick succession by Steyn balls clocked at 140 and 145K.

So the combination of how batsmen responded and the positioning of the slip cordon tells me that there are fewer fast bowlers around now than 30 years ago, and that only Mitchell Starc is in the pace bracket of the quicks of the 1980s.

Starc is similar in pace to Roberts, Lillee and Imran at their quickest, but significantly slower than Holding, Marshall, Patterson, Thomson, and Waqar at their fastest.

You talk of evolution, but in terms of pace bowling it is backwards evolution. Modern quick bowlers don't do enough First Class bowling to develop strong bodies that can withstand sustained use for very fast bowling. They do too much gym work and too little bowling, so they can sustain 145K in a 4 or 10 over per day format, but in Tests speeds are getting slower and slower.

Glenn McGrath was slower than Ambrose and Garner, who bowled the same style, and Hazlewood is even slower.

Dale Steyn is a very skilful bowler, but at Test level he can't bowl anywhere near as quickly as Allan Donald did at the same point in his career.

 

[Junaids]

Just watched the extended highlights of that innings and I don't see whats so special about it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extraordinary about that innings ... looks great because of the ordinary batting from the rest of the English players. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63557.html



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extra ordinary about the pitch ... you get them all the time even now. As I said its the batting at the other end that made Gooch's inngs stand out. Otherwise no team lasts that long on a bad pitch.

Yes, that's what I wrote in my post.

The 154 got instant legend status that it just didn't deserve. There were no demons in the pitch: Headingley was going through a phase of incredible swing with a Reader ball.

Marshall, Watkin, De Freitas and Pringle took loads of wickets with swing. Patterson and Walsh and Malcolm actually got hardly any, whereas if the pitch was venomous they would have taken a lot.

In fact, when Pakistan visited 12 months later England went so far as to call up the ancient Neil Mallender as a 125K swing bowler, knowing how much Headingley encouraged swing with a Reader ball.

 

[Tusker]

1. You basically seem to want to compare series when Gavaskar did badly to series when Gooch did well.

2. Gavaskar is 4 years older than Gooch, so naturally you would expect them to play somewhat different bowlers. Know someone who accomplished nothing against the Holding and Garner? Donald Bradman!

3. "Please asess Gavaskar's averages in 1983-84" Oh, you mean the years when the WI speedsters were at their very best and Gooch went away to SA leaving his country to be whitewashed 5-0 at home?

4. "Gavaskar has not equaled Gooch's masterly 154 on a Leeds pitch with uneven bounce in 1991 against the Calypsos in the most adverse of situations." Gavaskar exceeded that innings with his 220 that was part of India's series win. Anyway, comparison between two players cannot be based on a single innings they played.

5. "Even If Sunny statistically edged Gooch against pure pace never forget that Gooch dominated bowling more and was not basically defensive". Gavaskar being "defensive" is what his country needed when the other batsmen in his team were suspect against pace. That adds to rather than subtracts from his accomplishments. Being able to play long in Test matches is a good thing.

5. "Only 5 of Gavaskar's 13centuries v the Calypsos were scored against a speedster who was genuinely quick". So Gavaskar scored 5 centuries against "genuinely quick" WI bowlers. Know how many Tests he needed to score that? 15. Know how many Tests Gooch needed to score his 5 centuries against the WI? 26!

So basically even using your filters, Gavaskar scored centuries against WI at 26/15 = 1.73X the rate compared to Gooch. There is simply no comparison between Gavaskar and Gooch.

good post based on sound facts. Just to add to that ... Sunny is the only opener that managed to score a run a ball hundred against those WI bowlers ( Delhi 1983 )

BTW India is the only team that played 4 Tests in WI where all the 4 great WI fast bowlers were playing ( Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Holding )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Given how people here go on and on about how great the WI fast bowlers were you would imgaine that they would pick Jimmy Amarnath as the greatest batsman of all time .... but then the bias kicks in and arbitrary criteria come into play

Welcome to the world of Cricket Analysis where Bias, Arbitrary and randomness are the deciding factors. No space here for clear thinking , verifiable facts and common sense.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION]

No response to this post ?

Hardly sufficient evidence to be critical of this genius..We hardly have enough footage.Read historians describe Hobbs batting in the worst of conditions like at the Oval in 1926 and in 192829 at Melbourne.Bradman could not equal Hobbs on bad pitches.We do not have proper videos of that era.Neverthless Hobbs splayed bowling that even f not express pace were lethal.I visualize Hobs with his great mastery dominating any types of bowling.Lok at his staggering average of 56.94 .Pitches were uncovered then.

 

[Junaids]

good post based on sound facts. Just to add to that ... Sunny is the only opener that managed to score a run a ball hundred against those WI bowlers ( Delhi 1983 )

BTW India is the only team that played 4 Tests in WI where all the 4 great WI fast bowlers were playing ( Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Holding )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Given how people here go on and on about how great the WI fast bowlers were you would imgaine that they would pick Jimmy Amarnath as the greatest batsman of all time .... but then the bias kicks in and arbitrary criteria come into play

Welcome to the world of Cricket Analysis where Bias, Arbitrary and randomness are the deciding factors. No space here for clear thinking , verifiable facts and common sense.

I have written often that, even though Amarnath came right back down to Earth a few months later, those two series against Pakistan and West Indies in 1982-83 in my opinion are the greatest peak of batting in history.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

good post based on sound facts. Just to add to that ... Sunny is the only opener that managed to score a run a ball hundred against those WI bowlers ( Delhi 1983 )

BTW India is the only team that played 4 Tests in WI where all the 4 great WI fast bowlers were playing ( Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Holding )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Given how people here go on and on about how great the WI fast bowlers were you would imgaine that they would pick Jimmy Amarnath as the greatest batsman of all time .... but then the bias kicks in and arbitrary criteria come into play

Welcome to the world of Cricket Analysis where Bias, Arbitrary and randomness are the deciding factors. No space here for clear thinking , verifiable facts and common sense.

Gavaskar's 90 at Ahmedabad was to me a better innings considering the conditions .True he scored at a run a ball and it was a classic but the wicket was hardly as quick as those at Kingston,Barbados or as uneven as Leeds.His 90 on treacherous pitch was close to an all-time best.Overall Jimmy Amarnath performed best in a single series against great pace while Vishy's 97 at Madras was close to the best on a fiery track .I am not denying that Gavaskar was amongst the top 3 opening batsmen ever with Jack Hobbs and Len Hutton and amongst the dozen best of all time.However he was not necessarily the greatest against pace or on fast tracks.Andy Roberts thought Vishwanath was better on a bouncy strip while Lillee rated Barry Richards,Graeme Pollock and Viv Richards more difficult to bowl to.

 

[Harsh Thakor]

I have written often that, even though Amarnath came right back down to Earth a few months later, those two series against Pakistan and West Indies in 1982-83 in my opinion are the greatest peak of batting in history.

In terms of facing genuine pace I absolutely agree.Did you read my list of best performances i series against genuine pace bowling?Gooch in 1981 ,Wasim Raja in 1977,Greg Chappell in 1979 in supertests and Steve Waugh in 1995 were just behind.How do you feel about that positioning?

 

[MMHS]

Just watched the extended highlights of that innings and I don't see whats so special about it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extraordinary about that innings ... looks great because of the ordinary batting from the rest of the English players. http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63557.html



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhVQCkbPvcQ

Nothing extra ordinary about the pitch ... you get them all the time even now. As I said its the batting at the other end that made Gooch's inngs stand out. Otherwise no team lasts that long on a bad pitch.

In that Test, some of the all time greats were playing, yet, apart from that 154, next innings was 73 by Richards & 63 by Richardson.

On that wicket, against that attack, any current team would struggle to score 154 in total - but we can agree to disagree on this.

As I said, Shane bowled against Hari, Zampa bowls against Chandi - it's relative, which pair is better.

 

[Tusker]

Now, I disagree totally here. And I do so as someone who thoroughly enjoys your posts and your challenges.

Thanks for the kind words ... similarly I quite enjoy your very interesting posts that have a completely different take from mine. Its always a pleasure talking to you.


About human eye limitations ... thats not my opinion ... its pure science ... there is no way a human eye can detect speed of a moving object that too from the stands easily about atleast 70 -80 mtrs away from the action. Especially so when you have no frame of reference considering you are talking about the 70s and 80s when speed guns werent part of the TV broadcast and you couldn't fit Bowlers in approx speed ranges. Let me know if you want me to dig scientific evidence.

I can't really argue with your Jack Hobbs comments - I obviously never saw him play and, like you, I find the film footage singularly unimpressive.

That post was for Harsh Thakor ... I know me and you have discussed this in the past and I appreciate your honest response on that matter ... most people would try to deflect that or offer politically correct explanations and try to rationalize their way out of admitting Hobbs really poor technique.

But over the last 40 years I have seen batsmen come and go. The likes of Gavaskar, Gooch and Boycott had much better footwork and defensive technique than almost all modern players, and I saw how they avoided getting hit or even fencing at the ball. In contrast, since I started writing this reply I've seen Ross Taylor hit on the body twice in quick succession by Steyn balls clocked at 140 and 145K.

So the combination of how batsmen responded and the positioning of the slip cordon tells me that there are fewer fast bowlers around now than 30 years ago, and that only Mitchell Starc is in the pace bracket of the quicks of the 1980s.

And therein lies the problem with your approach. Just because 2 batsmen are exhibiting similar reactions to fast bowling does not mean that the bowlers involved are bowling at the same speeds. A very easy way to check that out is Tailenders batting to avg bowlers.

The limits of speed that batsmen from the past could negotiate was lesser than what it is today. Granted there will be exceptions when comparing 80s to current day but pretty sure that the farther you go back in time and compare the batsmen from then to now there is no doubt whatsoever that the skills of current top batsmen would be far better than those from the older ERAs ... nothing illustrates that more than the Hobbs footage.

Starc is similar in pace to Roberts, Lillee and Imran at their quickest, but significantly slower than Holding, Marshall, Patterson, Thomson, and Waqar at their fastest.

You talk of evolution, but in terms of pace bowling it is backwards evolution. Modern quick bowlers don't do enough First Class bowling to develop strong bodies that can withstand sustained use for very fast bowling. They do too much gym work and too little bowling, so they can sustain 145K in a 4 or 10 over per day format, but in Tests speeds are getting slower and slower.

Glenn McGrath was slower than Ambrose and Garner, who bowled the same style, and Hazlewood is even slower.

Fast bowling speeds fascinate me a lot ... which is why I have watched all available footage of those bowlers and I am yet to find one single footage where Marshall and Co even remotely appear to be bowling remotely close to 150Ks There is plenty of footage available on youtube to judge. Don't tell me the best came only in those matches for which footage is missing.

I can show you footage of McGrath bowling 140K plus.

Dale Steyn is a very skilful bowler, but at Test level he can't bowl anywhere near as quickly as Allan Donald did at the same point in his career.

Steyn is now 33 and is still bowling well at top pace ... At 33 yrs of Age Donald was pretty much done and dusted. He played only a handful of tests past age 33. Steyn will end up playing atleast 50% more Tests than Donald due to the fitness and strength conditioning regimen that he follows.

I agree that fast bowlers dont play much First Class cricket but they do play a lot of other forms of cricket and have extreemly strict fitness and diet regimens. The days of happy-go-lucky cricketers who went straight to the party after play and drank till early hours are long gone.

 

[Tusker]

In that Test, some of the all time greats were playing, yet, apart from that 154, next innings was 73 by Richards & 63 by Richardson.

On that wicket, against that attack, any current team would struggle to score 154 in total - but we can agree to disagree on this.

As I said, Shane bowled against Hari, Zampa bowls against Chandi - it's relative, which pair is better.

Its all good to show reputation certificates to claim A > B but its quite another to actually show some footage of extra ordinary passages of cricket from that era that people swear by and claim it happened all the time back in the good old days when the grass was greener the bowlers were super fast and the batsmen were supposedly real men.

 

[cricketpatzer]

good post based on sound facts. Just to add to that ... Sunny is the only opener that managed to score a run a ball hundred against those WI bowlers ( Delhi 1983 )

BTW India is the only team that played 4 Tests in WI where all the 4 great WI fast bowlers were playing ( Roberts, Marshall, Garner, Holding )

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Given how people here go on and on about how great the WI fast bowlers were you would imgaine that they would pick Jimmy Amarnath as the greatest batsman of all time .... but then the bias kicks in and arbitrary criteria come into play

Welcome to the world of Cricket Analysis where Bias, Arbitrary and randomness are the deciding factors. No space here for clear thinking , verifiable facts and common sense.

Thanks for your post. Your cricinfo reference is very informative, Gooch doesn't look all that good with an average of 18. The amount of information available to us if we are willing to search is phenomenal

 

[Tusker]

Hardly sufficient evidence to be critical of this genius..We hardly have enough footage.

That footage is scripted for a Movie producer to illustrate what was then considered to be perfect batting technique. It was done in perfect conditions using a no-name bowler and later certified by Hobbs. He was even paid for it. There is no way you are going to get out of this one.

Read historians describe Hobbs batting in the worst of conditions like at the Oval in 1926 and in 192829 at Melbourne.Bradman could not equal Hobbs on bad pitches.We do not have proper videos of that era.Neverthless Hobbs splayed bowling that even f not express pace were lethal.I visualize Hobs with his great mastery dominating any types of bowling.Lok at his staggering average of 56.94 .Pitches were uncovered then.

Did these historians have knowledge of how the future would unfold when they declared Hobbs the greatest batsman ? Nobody can tell for sure how the evolution process unfolds. How can people not realize such a simple thing before falling hook line and sinker for eyewitness accounts that are static ?

No historian is going to convince me that Hobbs had the technique to even handle 120K bowling. Reason : that batting technique. Just aint happening. Very simple and straightforward logic.

Infact that footage is a great example of why people should not form opinions of past ERA's based on written accounts. Because the two aint the same. Now Iam not saying all the historians are lying. What Iam saying is that this was the Gold standard back then. They didnt know any better!!.. There is absolutely nothing that I can see in that footage that deserves such high praise for Hobbs. And then there is the fact that he made 100 FC centuries after 40 yrs of age. All crystal clear signs that cricket standards were very ordinary back then as compared to now.

 

[cricketpatzer]

All crystal clear signs that cricket standards were very ordinary back then as compared to now.

In sports where we can actually measure progress, for example 100M, long jump, swimming etc. the progress with time is easy to see. We should expect similar progress in cricket, baseball, football etc.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Steyn is now 33 and is still bowling well at top pace ... At 33 yrs of Age Donald was pretty much done and dusted. He played only a handful of tests past age 33. Steyn will end up playing atleast 50% more Tests than Donald due to the fitness and strength conditioning regimen that he follows.

Although I do see some sense in what you're arguing, you're merely betraying your own lack of objectivity with this piece of garbage. You never saw Donald play did you? The guy was absolutely phenomenal till he was 35 when he bowled himself into the ground on the dead wickets of the West Indies. He bowled magnificently against England in 99, India, SL and NZ in 2000, and WI in 2001. In fact, he took 77 wickets at an average of 20 between 1999 (aged 32-33) and 2001 (aged 34-35). Stop making grandiose conclusions without an open mind, it makes you look clueless and petulant.

 

[Hawkeye]

Loving this.

[MENTION=132062]Harsh Thakor[/MENTION] with a great thread again.

It's great to see all you oldies (in a good way) unite and share knowledge from the golden eras of cricket. Can't contribute as I have no idea about those bats.

 

[Tusker]

Although I do see some sense in what you're arguing, you're merely betraying your own lack of objectivity with this piece of garbage. You never saw Donald play did you? The guy was absolutely phenomenal till he was 35 when he bowled himself into the ground on the dead wickets of the West Indies. He bowled magnificently against England in 99, India, SL and NZ in 2000, and WI in 2001. In fact, he took 77 wickets at an average of 20 between 1999 (aged 32-33) and 2001 (aged 34-35). Stop making grandiose conclusions without an open mind, it makes you look clueless and petulant.

Please check the context of that particular discussion on Donald vs Steyn ... its mainly about fitness . Allan Donald missed 14 out of the 26 tests that SA played in that time period ( 2000 till his last Test in Feb 2002). Sad finish to a great career. One of my top 10 bowlers IMO. Steyn is a better bowler but Donald was more easy on the eye's.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Please check the context of that particular discussion on Donald vs Steyn ... its mainly about fitness . Allan Donald missed 14 out of the 26 tests that SA played in that time period ( 2000 till his last Test in Feb 2002). Sad finish to a great career. One of my top 10 bowlers IMO. Steyn is a better bowler but Donald was more easy on the eye's.

You're shifting the goalposts here, you implied Donald was done and dusted as a bowler after the age of 33, I just pointed out that was definitely not the case. To solely blame his fitness problems on training regimes of the 90s is facile and superficial.

Anyway, it's almost as if you've been living under a rock over the past year and a half and ignored the much publicized fitness problems suffered by Steyn that have forced him to miss 6 test matches. Wait and see how his career progresses before making grand statements as I said before.

 

[Tusker]

You're shifting the goalposts here, you implied Donald was done and dusted as a bowler after the age of 33, I just pointed out that was definitely not the case. To solely blame his fitness problems on training regimes of the 90s is facile and superficial.

Missing more than 50% of Tests in his last 2 yrs and doing well in only few of those tests (Check his Avg + S/R in the 2001/2) is not the Donald that you are trying to paint. So yeah I stand by my post that he was pretty much done by 33. A few good games here and there doesn't mean that he was playing like the top strike bowler we knew him as.

Anyway, it's almost as if you've been living under a rock over the past year and a half and ignored the much publicized fitness problems suffered by Steyn that have forced him to miss 6 test matches. Wait and see how his career progresses before making grand statements as I said before.

Grand statements ? he has already played more tests than Donald and taken more Test wkts at far better S/R already. Even if he doesn't play any more tests he is already achieved more than Allan Donald at significantly better S/R. He was past Donald more than a year ago. Anything he does now is over and above that. Time will tell where he will finish up with. It will be interesting to see if he makes it into the 2019 WC squad by which time he will be almost 36.

 

[Last Monetarist]

Missing more than 50% of Tests in his last 2 yrs and doing well in only few of those tests (Check his Avg + S/R in the 2001/2) is not the Donald that you are trying to paint. So yeah I stand by my post that he was pretty much done by 33. A few good games here and there doesn't mean that he was playing like the top strike bowler we knew him as.



Grand statements ? he has already played more tests than Donald and taken more Test wkts at far better S/R already. Even if he doesn't play any more tests he is already achieved more than Allan Donald at significantly better S/R. He was past Donald more than a year ago. Anything he does now is over and above that. Time will tell where he will finish up with. It will be interesting to see if he makes it into the 2019 WC squad by which time he will be almost 36.

Firstly, I thought we were arguing over the merits of both bowlers after the age of 33 and not based on overall careers hence my suggestion that you should wait to see how Steyn does over the next couple of years. I agree that Steyn is the better bowler, though not by much.

Your point about Donald's average in 01/02 against Australia again betrays the fact that you were not following cricket back then. Donald effectively retired from test cricket in April 2001 after the tour of the West Indies as he felt he needed to focus on 50 over cricket with a home world cup on the horizon and had achieved pretty much all he had set out to do after the country's readmission. The selectors forced him to play against Australia even though he was undercooked both physically and mentally. He essentially came back to try and stave off a thrashing as Pollock, Ntini and Hayward were not fully trusted to succeed against Australia, with good reason as things transpired.

Finally, I agree with your point that we tend to romanticize the past because of human nature. But your constant tedious bleating about the merits of the modern game is even more annoying as you refuse to consider the nuances of how the game has naturally developed. It's an insult to the greats of the past to suggest that they are in any way inferior to those playing presently, and vice versa. I expect the likes of Steyn, Kohli, and Root to possess the mental and technical wherewithal to allow them to succeed in any era.

 

[Tusker]

Firstly, I thought we were arguing over the merits of both bowlers after the age of 33 and not based on overall careers hence my suggestion that you should wait to see how Steyn does over the next couple of years. I agree that Steyn is the better bowler, though not by much.

Your point about Donald's average in 01/02 against Australia again betrays the fact that you were not following cricket back then. Donald effectively retired from test cricket in April 2001 after the tour of the West Indies as he felt he needed to focus on 50 over cricket with a home world cup on the horizon and had achieved pretty much all he had set out to do after the country's readmission. The selectors forced him to play against Australia even though he was undercooked both physically and mentally. He essentially came back to try and stave off a thrashing as Pollock, Ntini and Hayward were not fully trusted to succeed against Australia, with good reason as things transpired.

Was definitely following back then but hard to keep track and remember all these things after soo many years ... I remember watching Donald in 2003 WC getting hit around and felt very sad.

Finally, I agree with your point that we tend to romanticize the past because of human nature. But your constant tedious bleating about the merits of the modern game is even more annoying as you refuse to consider the nuances of how the game has naturally developed. It's an insult to the greats of the past to suggest that they are in any way inferior to those playing presently, and vice versa. I expect the likes of Steyn, Kohli, and Root to possess the mental and technical wherewithal to allow them to succeed in any era.

Not sure what nuances I have refused to accept but Perhaps you have not read my posts (elsewhere) on this forum about my take on past greats ... I have nothing but tremendous respect for what they achieved and their contributions to take the game to the next level.

But at the same time most of the past ERA players are not saints when it comes to protecting their interests and making sure that they stay relevant long after having hung up their shoes.. So are Chappell , Benaud and Co were masters at this. The fruits of their work is pretty much visible right here on this thread and other threads on this matter of old vs new.

Glad we agree on the romanticism bit.

 

[Convict]

Gavaskar?

 

[Junaids]

I agree that fast bowlers dont play much First Class cricket but they do play a lot of other forms of cricket and have extreemly strict fitness and diet regimens. The days of happy-go-lucky cricketers who went straight to the party after play and drank till early hours are long gone.

That was already the case from the time that Kerry Packer set up World Series Cricket.

The revolution happened at that time. In 1974-75 and 1975-76 the Aussies trounced England and the West Indies due to the searing speed of Lillee and Thomson - and the footage does corroborate that.

But Clive Lloyd then developed this into a 4 man pace attack, which splattered India at home but not Pakistan.

Then Packer took pace to another level by virtue of the squads he assembled in World Series Cricket. Remember, the likes of Javed Miandad, Imran Khan and Desmond Haynes played on until well into the 1990s - almost 20 years later. But they all described the Ordeal by Pace in World Series Cricket as having been the hardest cricket they ever played.

Modern cricket has splintered into 2 forms: short, explosive 1 day cricket and long, sustained Tests. But you only develop the type of stamina you need to bowl 22 express overs per day by doing it on at least 50 days of the year. Modern bowlers just can't do it without breaking down.

Seriously, yesterday most of Dale Steyn's spell was in the 133-138K range - and he only bowled 8 overs. Allan Donald lacked the skills of Dale Steyn, I freely admit. But even when he was a year or two older he bowled very few deliveries slower than 140K.

 

[Tusker]

That was already the case from the time that Kerry Packer set up World Series Cricket.

The revolution happened at that time. In 1974-75 and 1975-76 the Aussies trounced England and the West Indies due to the searing speed of Lillee and Thomson - and the footage does corroborate that.

But Clive Lloyd then developed this into a 4 man pace attack, which splattered India at home but not Pakistan.

Then Packer took pace to another level by virtue of the squads he assembled in World Series Cricket. Remember, the likes of Javed Miandad, Imran Khan and Desmond Haynes played on until well into the 1990s - almost 20 years later. But they all described the Ordeal by Pace in World Series Cricket as having been the hardest cricket they ever played.

Modern cricket has splintered into 2 forms: short, explosive 1 day cricket and long, sustained Tests. But you only develop the type of stamina you need to bowl 22 express overs per day by doing it on at least 50 days of the year. Modern bowlers just can't do it without breaking down.

Seriously, yesterday most of Dale Steyn's spell was in the 133-138K range - and he only bowled 8 overs. Allan Donald lacked the skills of Dale Steyn, I freely admit. But even when he was a year or two older he bowled very few deliveries slower than 140K.

you are wrong about Steyns speed ... as per hawkeye he was operating between 86.7 - 90.9
http://www.espncricinfo.com/south-africa-v-new-zealand-2016/engine/match/936129.html

click on the hawkeye chart icon next to the statistics menu and then pick the bowling speeds chart at the bottom it will show min/max speeds for all bowlers in that match.

This is what I call irrefutable hard evidence unlike the evidence you put forward which is hearsey at best.

See the value in meticulous analysis based on credible hard facts ?

 

[Robert]

Yes, that's what I wrote in my post.

The 154 got instant legend status that it just didn't deserve. There were no demons in the pitch: Headingley was going through a phase of incredible swing with a Reader ball.

Marshall, Watkin, De Freitas and Pringle took loads of wickets with swing. Patterson and Walsh and Malcolm actually got hardly any, whereas if the pitch was venomous they would have taken a lot.

In fact, when Pakistan visited 12 months later England went so far as to call up the ancient Neil Mallender as a 125K swing bowler, knowing how much Headingley encouraged swing with a Reader ball.

As I recall, they had stopped using Readers by then, due to the lavish movement off the seam. Bowlers were taking stacks of wickets in the CC with the Reader on greentops, but were then exposed on the better test decks by test batsmen.

Remember, 1990 - The Year of the Bat? Teams were scoring 600, 700, 800 because many bowlers had got so reliant on the Readers what they couldn't take wickets with the Dukes.

As for the wicket having variable bounce in those days - I'll believe what Gooch and Gower said about it. They actually took guard on the thing.

 

[Junaids]

As I recall, they had stopped using Readers by then, due to the lavish movement off the seam. Bowlers were taking stacks of wickets in the CC with the Reader on greentops, but were then exposed on the better test decks by test batsmen.

Remember, 1990 - The Year of the Bat? Teams were scoring 600, 700, 800 because many bowlers had got so reliant on the Readers what they couldn't take wickets with the Dukes.

As for the wicket having variable bounce in those days - I'll believe what Gooch and Gower said about it. They actually took guard on the thing.

Well, I really can't argue with any of that!

 

[Nikhil_cric]

That was already the case from the time that Kerry Packer set up World Series Cricket.

The revolution happened at that time. In 1974-75 and 1975-76 the Aussies trounced England and the West Indies due to the searing speed of Lillee and Thomson - and the footage does corroborate that.

But Clive Lloyd then developed this into a 4 man pace attack, which splattered India at home but not Pakistan.

Then Packer took pace to another level by virtue of the squads he assembled in World Series Cricket. Remember, the likes of Javed Miandad, Imran Khan and Desmond Haynes played on until well into the 1990s - almost 20 years later. But they all described the Ordeal by Pace in World Series Cricket as having been the hardest cricket they ever played.

Modern cricket has splintered into 2 forms: short, explosive 1 day cricket and long, sustained Tests. But you only develop the type of stamina you need to bowl 22 express overs per day by doing it on at least 50 days of the year. Modern bowlers just can't do it without breaking down.

Seriously, yesterday most of Dale Steyn's spell was in the 133-138K range - and he only bowled 8 overs. Allan Donald lacked the skills of Dale Steyn, I freely admit. But even when he was a year or two older he bowled very few deliveries slower than 140K.

Oh please. Steyn averaged 140 k over an 8 over spell. You didn't watch the match at all if you're claiming otherwise. And this coming after a layoff at the age of 33. Any proof that Donald was bowling thst quick? I don't think so.

 

[Junaids]

you are wrong about Steyns speed ... as per hawkeye he was operating between 86.7 - 90.9
http://www.espncricinfo.com/south-africa-v-new-zealand-2016/engine/match/936129.html

click on the hawkeye chart icon next to the statistics menu and then pick the bowling speeds chart at the bottom it will show min/max speeds for all bowlers in that match.

This is what I call irrefutable hard evidence unlike the evidence you put forward which is hearsey at best.

See the value in meticulous analysis based on credible hard facts ?

Well I'm surprised.

I've been following the speeds on Cricinfo Hawkeye and on the TV speedgun, and they don't match.

I presumed there would only be one speed gun, but obviously not.

The Cricinfo Hawkeye one is consistently faster than the TV one. Yesterday Neil Wagner bowled an over with 4 deliveries out of 6 below 130 K in pace. But Hawkeye says his slowest ball of the match was 82.1 mph - which is 132.13 K.

Something doesn't add up here.

 

[Junaids]

Oh please. Steyn averaged 140 k over an 8 over spell. You didn't watch the match at all if you're claiming otherwise. And this coming after a layoff at the age of 33. Any proof that Donald was bowling thst quick? I don't think so.

No, he didn't. Read my post. Hawkeye on Cricinfo is consistently faster than the speed shown after each ball on TV.

 

[Tusker]

No, he didn't. Read my post. Hawkeye on Cricinfo is consistently faster than the speed shown after each ball on TV.

Hawkeye is the more reliable and accurate system out there. Not sure which company does the speed measurements for the TV coverage.

 

[The_Odd_One]

What is Sehwag doing in the top 10?

He was a monster only on flat tracks.

 

[Tusker]

What is Sehwag doing in the top 10?

He was a monster only on flat tracks.

I suppose you consider Indian pitches as flat ... if so then what do you make of Pontings Record in India which is very poor ? Specifically how does a ATG batsman be unable to make runs on flat pitches ?

 

[SuperKhan]

Has to be Boycott or B Richards. Amazing over with Boycott and holding. He seemed to have great concentration.
Massive loss to cricket that B Richards did not play more. Fantastic natural talent and now delivers brilliant coverage.

I have been trying to evaluate in order of merit the best opening batsmen of all time against genuine pace bowling in test cricket..This list does not evaluate overall merit of opening batsmen but only performances against genuine pace bowling attacks.

Best opening batsmen against genuine pace in order of merit in test matches.

1.Graham Gooch

Performed phenomenally well against the great foursome of Andy Roberts,Michael Holding,Colin Croft and Joel Garner in 1981 in the Carribean scoring centuries on the fastest pitches at Barbados and Kingston..His 153 at Sabina park was an all-time classic being one of the best displays of counter-attack against lethal pace.Averaged over 57 in that series.Also a marvel at Leeds when scoring 154 in 1991 in the worst of batting conditions blending the skill of a surgeon. with the courage of a soldier .Also prolific in Australia in 1990-91 averaging over 53 and versus Australia at home averaging over 56. in 1993 and over 46 in 1985.Averaged over 45 against great Calypso pace in series in West Indies in 1986 while averaged over 48 versus Pakistan with the great Wasim and Waqar in home series in 1992. Although not a champion technically he had great mastery in strokeplay displaying the skill and organization of an architect and the ferocity of a lion.Could despatch the best deliveries of Marshall,Holding,Wasim or Waqar with utmost contempt.Even Gavaskar has been overshadowed by Gooch against the great West Indian bowling attack.He has overshadowed any other opener against the best attacks in the Carribean.


2.Sunil Gavaskar/Len Hutton

Gavaskar and Hutton were almost carbon copy's of each other taking technical skill to it's highest zenith.Both were basically defensive and built an innings like an architect designing a building.Gavaskar faced the best bowlers ever like Roberts,Holding,Marshal,Lillee,Botham,Hadle,Wilis and Thomson.Hutton faced less greats but displayed phenomenal consistency against Lindwall and Miller in 2 series .Hutton like Gavaskar was also prolific in the Caribbean like in 1954.Gavaskar could well have been at no 1 but was relegated as his best averages in series v West Indies were against the mediocre bowling attacks.In 1983-84 he had some great scores but was relatively inconsistent against the great Carribean foursome.No doubt Gavaskar batted like a champion against Roberts and Holding in 1975-76, Imran and Sarafraz in 1978-79 and against Imran in 1979-80 at home but we missed seing Gavaskar at his best aginst Lillee in 1978 in Australia because of Packer Cricket or against the great Carribean ace battery in 1978-79 in India.


4.Barry Richards/Jack Hobbs

Potentially Barry have been at no 1 but did not play sufficient International cricket.In Packer cricket toyed with the likes of Denis Lillee and co when scoring 207 in 1977-78 and 125 n.o for rest of the world in 1978 supertest final.Only Viv Richards displayed equal attacking agression.Hobbs did not face the great speedsters but neverthlesss negotiated some of the finest bowlers.On wet or bad pitches he was the greatest of all openers and maybe batsmen.Had he played in 1970=s r 80's Hobbs could wel have even overshadowed Gavaskar and Gooch.


6.Saed Anwar

Few left -handed batsmen could launch such a blistering attack on opponents as Anwar could .His bating blended the attacking instinct of a tiger with the poetic grace of a sculptor.At his best against great South African bowling in 1997-98 in South Africa and in Australia in 1999-2000.Exhibited supremacy in batting skill amongst openers of his generations .


7.Hanif Mohammad

Technically simply a giant.Arguably the most complete of all opening batsmen aggregating 628 run sin 1957-58 in the Carribean incliuding a triple hundred.Rated low down because he did not face the likes of Marshal,Lillee or Holding.


8.Geoff Boycott

Often resembled a boulder resisting a gale.Could be boring but was often the most difficult batsmen to dislodge.Boycott posessed the grammar of an English professor and concentration of a Buddhist monk.Few batsmen posesed as much clinical precision as Boycott.At his best in West Indies in 1981 when averaging over 44 ,at home against the same team a season earlier in 1980 averaging over 40 and in Australia in 1979-80.Holding found Geoff one of the hardest batsmen to ever dislodge .His 99 n.o in Perth in 1979-80 was truly a revelation.


9.Gordon Greenidge

On his day the equal of Barry Richards.Few batsmen moulded pugnacity and solidity so perfectly.In full flow Greenidge looked like a galleon in full sail.He combined the attacking agression of an army battalion wit the technical skill of a surgeon.Rated low because he was not relatively succesful on tours of Australia.Neverthless played the Aussie attack superbly in 1984 at home and consistently in 1988-89 in Australia.His 226 at Barbados against a top class Aussie attack proved that on his day he could join any great opening batsmen.


10.Virendra Sehwag

In terms of raw talent perhaps Barry Richard's equal.Not at his best on the fast,bouncy surfaces.However some of his best innings were classics in Australia and South Africa when he made the impact of a bulldozer on a cricket field.Inspite of restricted footwork his devastating reflexes,power and timing would have taken the micky out of the quickest paceman on his day.


11.Arthur Morris

The greatest of match-winners who we did not see against the greatest paceman.


12.Gen Turner

Did not prove himself sufficiently against great paceman but blended agression and grammar as few players ever did.Scored a phenomenal aggregate of over 600 runs in 4 tests in West Indies including scores of 259 and 223 in 1972 .Glen could resist great attacks with the resilience of a boulder and the technical skill of an architect.


13.Mark Taylor

Could be almost impossible to dislodge at his best with a huge array of strokes.Brilliantly negotiated the short,rising ball.Curtly Ambrose and Wasim Akram thought he was one of the hardest batsmen to dislodge.


14.Matthew Hayden

A master batsmen but not tested as much as other greats before.Few openers were more devastating in attack or could turn the complexion of a match more.Played relatively easier pace than Gavaskar,Boycott or Gooch.


15.Graeme Smith

Technically sound with great time in executing stroke.A graet natch-winner.


16.Demond Haynes

Few batsmen looked so flowing when batting.Often his bating reminded you of a lyric playing.His deftest touches could send the ball crashing over the ropes.Amassed a huge aggregate against Aussie bowling attacks in 1984 at home and in 1988-89 down under when he set a record aggregate for a West Indian batsmen for a series in Australia.

 

[The_Odd_One]

I suppose you consider Indian pitches as flat ... if so then what do you make of Pontings Record in India which is very poor ? Specifically how does a ATG batsman be unable to make runs on flat pitches ?

1. When did I say Indian pitches are flat? I said Sehwag was a monster on flat tracks and they can be anywhere.
2. Ponting did not have to prove his ability of playing fast bowling in India of all places when he has scored plethora of runs in Australia, England, and SA.

 

[Justcrazy]

1. When did I say Indian pitches are flat? I said Sehwag was a monster on flat tracks and they can be anywhere.
2. Ponting did not have to prove his ability of playing fast bowling in India of all places when he has scored plethora of runs in Australia, England, and SA.

But Sehwag was entertaining , even if you say they were flat tracks.

 

[Tusker]

1. When did I say Indian pitches are flat? I said Sehwag was a monster on flat tracks and they can be anywhere.

You didnt say it explicitly but it was implied. Most of Sehwag's epic innings are in Ind and few in SL, Pak.

2. Ponting did not have to prove his ability of playing fast bowling in India of all places when he has scored plethora of runs in Australia, England, and SA.

Doing well in India is a completely different challenge than doing well elsewhere other than those 3 countries. Yes the vested interests want us to believe that playing well in those countries is the holy grail but thats not true. To be considered a ATG you need to do well in all conditions. If you want to call Sehwag a FTB then similarly Ponting is a FTB as well.

 

[Chrish]

Haven't been an opener who can grab the opposition by their neck. Sehwag was one but he was a dud against quality pace.

I guess opening is a job for genuine grinders

 

[andy0204]

You didnt say it explicitly but it was implied. Most of Sehwag's epic innings are in Ind and few in SL, Pak.



Doing well in India is a completely different challenge than doing well elsewhere other than those 3 countries. Yes the vested interests want us to believe that playing well in those countries is the holy grail but thats not true. To be considered a ATG you need to do well in all conditions. If you want to call Sehwag a FTB then similarly Ponting is a FTB as well.

If you are telling ponting is FTB then i say you have no knowledge of cricket.
I agree ponting didnt do well in india but he did well in srilanka in 1999 tour where every australian batsmen didnt do well but ponting played murali very well and still averages better than dravid and kallis in srilanka.
Remember 2006 when australia toured bangladesh in first test it was gilchrist who saved them from having follow on but during chasing 300 runs it was ponting who saved defeat from bangladesh.

 

[chacha kashmiri]

Michael Atherton was good apart from Allan donald
And Matthew hayden was a beast albeit in a different era

Salman butt was probably Pakistanis best opener in the modern era especially overseas which is where Pakistanis tend to struggle

 

[Hasan123]

Michael Atherton was good apart from Allan donald
And Matthew hayden was a beast albeit in a different era

Salman butt was probably Pakistanis best opener in the modern era especially overseas which is where Pakistanis tend to struggle

Atherton was Ambrose and McGraths bunny. He was mostly okay against Donald.

 

[Majid Khan]

Always rated Mohammed Hafeez very highly against genuine pace bowling , looks in total control most of the time.

One of my greatest cricketing fantasies is what it would have been like if Mohammed Hafeez faced Michael Holding in peak form on a dangerous looking 1980s wicket at Sabina Park , Jamaica .. what a duel that could have been.

 

[andy0204]

Always rated Mohammed Hafeez very highly against genuine pace bowling , looks in total control most of the time.

One of my greatest cricketing fantasies is what it would have been like if Mohammed Hafeez faced Michael Holding in peak form on a dangerous looking 1980s wicket at Sabina Park , Jamaica .. what a duel that could have been.

Love your analysis on Hafeez.

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We celebrate Graham Gooch on <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ICCHallOfFame?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ICCHallOfFame</a> – a bedrock of the England batting lineup during his career &#55357;&#56399;<br><br>More &#55357;&#56573;️ <a href="https://t.co/wNrHpZWubJ">https://t.co/wNrHpZWubJ</a> <a href="https://t.co/M1mcDhlkKw">pic.twitter.com/M1mcDhlkKw</a></p>— ICC (@ICC) <a href="https://twitter.com/ICC/status/1398255292857597952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 28, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>