Greg Chappell - just how good do people think he was?

[Matt79]

In a lot of discussions I've had/seen here, there seems to be an almost consensus that G. Chappell was the best Aussie batsman apart from Bradman. I'm just curious as to how highly or not people rate him compared to the other usual suspects (Lara, Tendulkar, Richards, Compton, Sobers) as one of the all time great batsmen?

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He's right near the very top IMO. After Bradman, he's in the same group as the likes of Sobers and Hobbs. Fair call for a spot in the middle order in an all-time XI.

 

[adharcric]

He fits right into the bottom of my Top 10. The top tier has Bradman, Sobers and Hobbs followed by Tendulkar, Richards, Hammond and Lara. Chappell and Gavaskar are next IMO.

 

[archie mac]

Almost the perfect batsman to watch, classical with all of the shots, never wore a helmet. Played against great bowlers on lesser pitches and with inferior bats.

Ponting is yet to finish, but will finish in front of GSC for mine

 

[Swervy]

You wont find many players better off their legs than Chappell.

I remember his horror spell in 1981 in both tests and ODIs, when he really looked like he would never score a run again, but that was about the only time he looked out of sorts , and he still managed a double hundred!!!

You can add to his record the success he had in the WSC Supertests.

I have a hunch though that Ponting will eventually be considered slightly better given Punters sheer productivity

 

[C_C]

He's an alltime great in my books but a tad overrated. Have heard several older fans comment that the difference between the two Chappell brothers were Ian was a 'crunch' player and Greg a fairweather batsman. Perhaps his spectacular collapse against sustained quality bowling by the windies was an implicit confirmation. But still in the top 10 alltime for me - but behind Braddles, Tendulkar, Lara, Viv, Sobers, Gavaskar and Border.


Beauty to watch though- easily the most graceful and 'subcontinental/caribbean-like' Aussie batsman i've ever seen. So that'd compensate for the fairweather part in my books.

 

[Swervy]

He's an alltime great in my books but a tad overrated. Have heard several older fans comment that the difference between the two Chappell brothers were Ian was a 'crunch' player and Greg a fairweather batsman. Perhaps his spectacular collapse against sustained quality bowling by the windies was an implicit confirmation. But still in the top 10 alltime for me - but behind Braddles, Tendulkar, Lara, Viv, Sobers, Gavaskar and Border.


Beauty to watch though- easily the most graceful and 'subcontinental/caribbean-like' Aussie batsman i've ever seen. So that'd compensate for the fairweather part in my books.

I always feel that the graceful batsmen tend to be classed as the 'fair weather' players...a bit unfair in Chappell case I think.

His bad run in the 1981/82 series was more down to just bad form really, he also struggled vs Pakistan (apart from the double century) that summer, and it wasnt only in the tests, but the one day series as well.(and really it was an awful run for such a class player, his confidence was shattered, and his technique really suffered for it, and even in his 61 in the Third test wasa real struggle)

Chappell in fact had played brilliantly only 2 years before that against an arguably better West Indian bowling attack, and also in 1975 as well (and as i say, he scored heavily in the West Indies during the WSC Supertests) so he had ceratinly shown that he could play vs the best the game had to offer

 

[Sanz]

As a batsman..one of the best.

As a leader/coach - One of the worst.

 

[Richard]

You can add to his record the success he had in the WSC Supertests.

No, you can't, they're rightly separate.

You can add both to his "achievements" but you can't treat the two as the same.

 

[Swervy]

No, you can't, they're rightly separate.

You can add both to his "achievements" but you can't treat the two as the same.

well I never said treat them the same...but it is still a part of his record as a cricketer, and the standard of bowling was fierce in those Supertests by most accounts

 

[Richard]

In a lot of discussions I've had/seen here, there seems to be an almost consensus that G. Chappell was the best Aussie batsman apart from Bradman. I'm just curious as to how highly or not people rate him compared to the other usual suspects (Lara, Tendulkar, Richards, Compton, Sobers) as one of the all time great batsmen?

IMO anyone who seriously attempts to separate Chappell and Richards is crazy.

The two were near enough exact contemporaries and broadly speaking their achievements were very similar.

Only difference was Richards was an in-your-face sort of chappie, Chappell much less so.

And as so often, that can make you look a better player than you are.

For mine, the top group of batsmen number any large number...

Bradman, Headley, Weekes, Woodfull, Hutton, etc. etc.

Chappell and Richards are both in the next tier down.

 

[Richard]

well I never said treat them the same...but it is still a part of his record as a cricketer, and the standard of bowling was fierce in those Supertests by most accounts

But the two were completely different - one was a private enterprise and one was a competition between players reprisenting, by chain, their country.

As I say - his achievements as a batsman should include those Packer games, but cricket as a whole should look upon them with distaste, as I've said 1,000 times.

 

[Natman20]

Was he the one that decided on the under-arm bowl? lets not get into that. Seeing as I never watched him play I can't really judge how great a player he was but going by stats they seem fairly similar to that of Pontings (Averages) and from reading a little bit about him he was certainly a great player and deffinately one of the better ones to play.

 

[steds]

He was alright.

 

[Swervy]

But the two were completely different - one was a private enterprise and one was a competition between players reprisenting, by chain, their country.

As I say - his achievements as a batsman should include those Packer games, but cricket as a whole should look upon them with distaste, as I've said 1,000 times.

well the standard was high, and the competition was fierce, and I look at those games with a bit more respect than I do some of the official tests that were being played at the time

 

[Richard]

I look on neither with any great seriousness.

One was a private (and pirate - by its own definition) enterprise and the other was something which was reduced to a skeleton in certain places (Australia, West Indies, Pakistan) and a shadow in others.

Anyone seriously judging anything by the Packer-weakened West Indies and Australian sides needs their head examined any equally anyone calling Packer games as equals of genuine Tests needs something similar.

 

[Neil Pickup]

pirate - by it's own definition

For God's sake. It's catching.

 

[Richard]

I often forget...

I see, after all, no good reason why "it" should have no possessive apostrophe...

 

[Neil Pickup]

I often forget...

I see, after all, no good reason why "it" should have no possessive apostrophe...

Because it's = it is. Simple.

 

[Richard]

"Neil's" = "Neil is" too.