Giles versus Tufnell - Who was better?

[Pratters]

Who was the better bowler?

The serious nature of this means that there is no irrelevent third option.

 

[Matteh]

Haha, ripping off my poll there.

Giles for me, because he's been one of my favourite players for the best part of 10 years.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

Tuffnell for me, because he's been one of my favourite players for the best part of 10 years.

 

[stumpski]

Better what?

IMO, Tufnell was the better bowler, Giles the better cricketer. Not an easy quality to define.

 

[Matteh]

Gillles vs Tufnelll is a battle for the ages.

 

[Pratters]

Better what?

Bowler. If I had a poll - Lara v Tendulkar, would you think any thing except better batsman?

 

[silentstriker]

Bowler. If I had a poll - Lara v Tendulkar, would you think any thing except better batsman?

That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.

 

[stumpski]

That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.

Exactly, if you'd said 'who was the more valuable player to have in your side?' Giles would win hands down.

Even though coaches might argue that Tufnell was a superior spin bowler.

 

[Pratters]

That's not a fair comparison. A big reason that Giles was a useful player was that he contributed importantly with the bat and in the field.

I do know that Giles contributed not only as a bowler. This is for who the better bowler is. I thought that would be obvious but given the ambiguity I have specified the same in the first post now.

 

[steds]

Exactly, if you'd said 'who was the more valuable player to have in your side?' Giles would win hands down.

It may have been closer if Tufnell had been handled differently, and would definitely be the other way around had Tufnell been inclined to work harder.

 

[Matteh]

Tufnell is cricket's Matt le Tissier, hands down.

 

[Anil]

tufnell was more talented, giles was steadier and more consistent....

 

[Tom Halsey]

I never watched Tufnell bowl during what I consider to be his peak apart from highlights, so I'm going from what I've read from various people, and statistics.

Basically, I think that Tufnell had the potential to be the best spinner we've had since covered pitches, and at his peak he in fact was. Up until the 1992 World Cup, he only averaged above 30 in one series, and that a debut series in Australia. And it's not as if he didn't cause an impact there - he had a catch dropped off a hat-trick ball, and generally had a **** time with umpiring decisions (umpire called McConnal IIRC, anyway he sounds like a bit of a **** to me). This run includes bowling England to victory several times. None of this run was played on traditionally turning wickets - no matches in Asia IIRC.

Anyway, after the 1992 World Cup was when the personal problems started, and he was never as consistent afterwards. I did watch him several times after this (watching him bowl out the Aussies in 1997 was what made me a bit interested in cricket in the first place) and he always looked a handful on the turning wicket, and looked innocuous on non-turning wickets, much like Giles.

I've stated my opinion on Giles in the other thread, and I do rate him quite highly for a finger-spinner, but I'm not convinced he was any better than Tufnell was 1992-onwards, and Tufnell pre-1992 was (I think) a considerably better bowler.

EDIT: I've just realized I've made two long (for me) and reasonably thought-out posts in CC in twenty minutes - unheard of.

 

[Richard]

IMO Tufnell never had much chance, he was too volatile and too unstable a person. He possessed skill with the ball, but was still nothing more than a fingerspinner.

IMO, Giles was the more complete person, and as a result a much, much more reliable bowler. Tufnell never managed any significant success on non-turning pitches, like any fingerspinner.

 

[DCC_legend]

AWTA.

Tuffers for the bowling option. Giles for the all-round cricker.

 

[Matt79]

Since the Pratyush has specified the poll is solely based on bowling ability, Tuffers...

He's still a wanker though!

 

[Richard]

I honestly feel Giles was the better bowler, even if Tufnell on first glance appeared to have more ability.

 

[The Sean]

Tuffers. I always felt he was a danger as a potential matchwinner, even if he rarely did it.

I never felt threatened by Giles, honest trier though he was.

 

[sideshowtim]

Tufnell is cricket's Matt le Tissier, hands down.

A player full of flair playing for a crap team? I agree

 

[GIMH]

Is there any way you can be bannedd from threads involving England? You're like an unintentional BLE.