Johnny75
Virtual Cock
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 35,066
- Reaction score
- 10,681
I'm sure he was.
But it's like nominating Orson Welles as the greatest actor of the 1980s
Transformers: The Movie was a fine piece of work I'll have you know.
Best England Cricket XI - 1978 to 2020
- Thread starter Sniffer
- Start date
Transformers: The Movie was a fine piece of work I'll have you know.
Doctor Doog
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,137
- Reaction score
- 86
Jack Russell
Alec Stewart
Bob Taylor
Not picking Knott for the reasons given above.
Alec Stewart
Bob Taylor
Not picking Knott for the reasons given above.
D
Deleted Cyber
Guest
This is very hard. Alan Knott was and absolute artist behind the stumps. A near genius. Because of the picked dates you get him at the end of his wonderful career. We are going to have the same for Derek Underwood who has 297 wickets.
Deutsch Wolf
aka Dawn
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 105,591
- Reaction score
- 28,430
12 Tests for Underwood in the timeframe specified and he averaged close to 34 with the ball. Although given our record with spinners, he might still have a shout just on basic figures!
The same would apply with my picks if it were a different span, if this were 2000-present then there is no chance I would pick Athers no matter how much I love him (tbf, as much as a broadcaster and journalist as I did a player).
The same would apply with my picks if it were a different span, if this were 2000-present then there is no chance I would pick Athers no matter how much I love him (tbf, as much as a broadcaster and journalist as I did a player).
Paddingtonwolf
Flaming Galah
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 76,957
- Reaction score
- 7,484
I'm sure he was.
But it's like nominating Orson Welles as the greatest actor of the 1980s
It's not only about the batting. He was a superlative keeper and far better than anybody with the gloves we have had since.
If it is set at 1978, and his last test was the end of the 81 Ashes then he is up for consideration.
Deutsch Wolf
aka Dawn
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 105,591
- Reaction score
- 28,430
It's six games though...fewer than any of Steve Rhodes, James Foster, Chris Read or Tim Ambrose. He can hardly be said to have had his mark in this timeframe especially given he barely made a run. And although I didn't see Knott, I'm not sure he was a better pure gloveman than Foster who at his peak was the best I've seen anywhere in the world.
I mean, vote for who you want I'm not your guvnor. I'm sure he was great, his peers rate him extremely highly. Just saying that within the parameters, you might look at the cold hard stats (and again - without seeing it, was there any particularly startling contribution from him in the 81 Ashes? He only played two games and they weren't exactly a top team. The other Tests he played were against the Windies, we lost to nil and he ended up with a series average that looks more Alan Mulllally than Allan Lamb) and wonder who had more impact.
If someone arbitrarily drew up August 1997 as the starting point for a Wolves team and I picked Bully (15 goals in 56 games, and no goals after September 1998) it would look a bit skewed!
I mean, vote for who you want
I'm not your guvnor. I'm sure he was great, his peers rate him extremely highly. Just saying that within the parameters, you might look at the cold hard stats (and again - without seeing it, was there any particularly startling contribution from him in the 81 Ashes? He only played two games and they weren't exactly a top team. The other Tests he played were against the Windies, we lost to nil and he ended up with a series average that looks more Alan Mulllally than Allan Lamb) and wonder who had more impact.If someone arbitrarily drew up August 1997 as the starting point for a Wolves team and I picked Bully (15 goals in 56 games, and no goals after September 1998) it would look a bit skewed!
darlowolf64
Supply Teacher & 2020/21 PTG Intertoto Cup winner
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2010
- Messages
- 30,016
- Reaction score
- 2,844
Which is why I picked him... Fantastic keeper, and I bloody can't stand Kent but still picked him
Deutsch Wolf
aka Dawn
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 105,591
- Reaction score
- 28,430
It's not a position where I can be 100% happy with my choices but you can only play with the deck you've got.
Prior - improved A LOT as a keeper through his career - at his best, he really had stepped it up and was genuinely good - but he was downright ropey in his first spell in the team and that's being kind. Rightly binned at that stage although it shouldn't have been for Tiny Tim who I never rated, too short (especially given we had Harmison banging it in relentlessly at the time, leading to tons of byes flying over his head) and genuinely only had one shot. Prior was a superb batsman but his injury-related decline was very sad to see. We still haven't replaced him.
Stewart - as mentioned last night I'd rather we'd never have had him keeping. He was always somewhat manufactured behind the stumps and was never a standout there. We only picked him there to balance the team and as I say, it affected his batting when we did. He should have been a specialist top five batsman and we'd have seen him averaging nearer 50 IMO than just under 40 as was the case.
Russell - wasn't actually that great a stylist and clearly had limitations with the bat, but was definitely the superior keeper through the 90s, and had character and heart about him. Messed about a bit too much. I mean being ditched for Steve Rhodes and Warren Hegg? Really? I sort of get the argument with Stewart and balance (even though we always messed it up by then just picking a sub-standard player) but those two were no way better.
Couldn't have Foster as much as I rated him behind the stumps, the keeper here is going to bat at 7 surely? His record doesn't stack up (although in his 7 Tests, he averaged more than Knott did in his 6... ) It can't just be on keeping, the game hasn't worked like that for about 50 years.
Not having Bairstow as he's had one good year of Test cricket ever and he's been playing since 2012. Buttler's record of one Test century speaks for itself. Neither of them are actually particularly good keepers, Ben Foakes is miles better than both in that respect.
Prior - improved A LOT as a keeper through his career - at his best, he really had stepped it up and was genuinely good - but he was downright ropey in his first spell in the team and that's being kind. Rightly binned at that stage although it shouldn't have been for Tiny Tim who I never rated, too short (especially given we had Harmison banging it in relentlessly at the time, leading to tons of byes flying over his head) and genuinely only had one shot. Prior was a superb batsman but his injury-related decline was very sad to see. We still haven't replaced him.
Stewart - as mentioned last night I'd rather we'd never have had him keeping. He was always somewhat manufactured behind the stumps and was never a standout there. We only picked him there to balance the team and as I say, it affected his batting when we did. He should have been a specialist top five batsman and we'd have seen him averaging nearer 50 IMO than just under 40 as was the case.
Russell - wasn't actually that great a stylist and clearly had limitations with the bat, but was definitely the superior keeper through the 90s, and had character and heart about him. Messed about a bit too much. I mean being ditched for Steve Rhodes and Warren Hegg? Really? I sort of get the argument with Stewart and balance (even though we always messed it up by then just picking a sub-standard player) but those two were no way better.
Couldn't have Foster as much as I rated him behind the stumps, the keeper here is going to bat at 7 surely? His record doesn't stack up (although in his 7 Tests, he averaged more than Knott did in his 6...
) It can't just be on keeping, the game hasn't worked like that for about 50 years.Not having Bairstow as he's had one good year of Test cricket ever and he's been playing since 2012. Buttler's record of one Test century speaks for itself. Neither of them are actually particularly good keepers, Ben Foakes is miles better than both in that respect.
D
Deleted Cyber
Guest
Which is why I picked him... Fantastic keeper, and I bloody can't stand Kent but still picked him
Well I love Kent but can't pick him due to the timeframe. My WK picks, much as it pains me in this time frame are
Russell
Prior
Stewart
Paddingtonwolf
Flaming Galah
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2009
- Messages
- 76,957
- Reaction score
- 7,484
At least no-one is picking Paul Downton. He was bang average.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2010
- Messages
- 19,941
- Reaction score
- 4,371
His average as a test opener (56) deserves recognition. Still the number 3 slot to consider him for.
D
Deleted Cyber
Guest
Really?
Not for me and he started at Kent!
Downton flattered to receive. Neither a test batsman or a test keeper. Stewart was better on both counts as a keeper Knott Taylor, Bairstow senior, Tolchard were all better than Paul Rupert .
Tony Towner
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2010
- Messages
- 36,016
- Reaction score
- 21,170
David Gower
Jonathan Trott
Nasser Hussain
Jonathan Trott
Nasser Hussain
