• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Left-arm spinners

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I understand the whole spinning it back into the right handers disadvantage, but it hasn't stopped countless offies having decent Test careers. Obviously there's just a smaller percentage of bowlers who are left armers, and then an even smaller amount that can bowl wrist spin decently, but it's just odd (to me at least) that that aspect of bowling is so under-represented at the upper levels.
With the standard "I'm no expert on spin" proviso, I'd guess that with the fact that wrist spin is that bit harder to master than its orth(o)dox cousin, traditionally few lefty bowlers would've thought it worth sacrificing the natural advantage of turning the ball away from the right hander.
 

fredfertang

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
There will never be more than a tiny handful of great wristspinners. Wristspin is and always has been incredibly difficult to bowl to a terribly high standard - you can count the number of those who've bowled it to Test standard on two hands at worst, one at best.
Depends how you define Test standard I suppose but I'd say these 11 were high quality bowlers and that several more were decent players at Test level


Vogler
Schwarz
Faulkner
Mailey
Grimmett
O'Reilly
Wright
Warne
Gupte
Qadir
Chandrasekhar
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
There will never be more than a tiny handful of great wristspinners. Wristspin is and always has been incredibly difficult to bowl to a terribly high standard - you can count the number of those who've bowled it to Test standard on two hands at worst, one at best.
Yeah, that was entirely my point.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Yeah, you're probably right Richard.

Shane Warne
Muttiah Muralitharan
Clarrie Grimmett
Bhagwath Chandrasekhar
Subhash Gupte
Bill O'Reilly
Aubrey Faulkner
Anil Kumble

There's 8, and after that you're struggling. Would you consider Abdul Qadir and Richie Benaud in that same league?
Only for a brief time (and with Qadir there's so many variables to throw in that I've never yet attempted a serious analysis), and in the case of Faulkner I'm still to-be-convinced - most rated Vogler as a better pure bowler. The SAfrican wristspin triplet of the 1900s was a fascinating one, and I've long wished more Test cricket had been played so as to give a more apt impression of just how good each of the aforementioned and Schwarz were.

Also, as for Kumble, and to some extent Chandra, the amount of wrist they actually used was debateable, and for Kumble he was mostly more of a topspinner than sidespinner, for most of his career. Chandra I know relatively little about so I've always tried not to comment too much.

Personally the only stock-standard wristspinners I'd rate as conclusively Test-class were:
Grimmett
O'Reilly
Gupte
(Benaud)
Warne
Muralitharan

With, as I say, plenty of questions able to be asked about Schwarz, Vogler and Faulkner and whether they deserve to be added or not.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Depends how you define Test standard I suppose but I'd say these 11 were high quality bowlers and that several more were decent players at Test level


Vogler
Schwarz
Faulkner
Mailey
Grimmett
O'Reilly
Wright
Warne
Gupte
Qadir
Chandrasekhar
Would disagree in terms of Mailey and Wright - both were profligate in the extreme from the wristspin "classic" school. Comparable to Stuart MacGill, who was also the a wristspin classic - he bowled sensationally occasionally and dreadfully often.

As for Abdul Qadir, well, yes, he was Test-class... at home, in the middle of his career. Rarely did much outside Pakistan and had some fairly poor times at the start and end of his career, and not just in the usual very-short-period mould either. I've a fair bit to do before I start assessing him properly, but I've always had a good deal of question-marks over exactly how good he was myself.
 

Flem274*

123/5
He was a not-terribly-good spinner, from all I've heard; only started to become a bowler who was taken seriously when he started bowling seam-up.

Either way, the question of "have there ever been any great left-arm spinners apart from Vettori?" is one of the more odd ones I've heard posed recently. There have been many left-arm fingerspinners who've enjoyed miles more success than Vettori has. The days of fingerspinners, left- or right-arm, being able to dominate all over the globe are gone, however, and went a long time ago. It is no longer possible for a fingerspinner to have sustained success in England or New Zealand, it hasn't been in Australia or South Africa for a very long time indeed, it virtually never was in Pakistan (except briefly in the days of Iqbal Qasim and Tauseef Ahmed then later Saqlain Mushtaq), and at the present time even the original spin-haven of India produces less spin-friendly Test tracks than used to be the case. Only Sri Lanka really remains the proper spin-haven it should be.

All of the great English fingerspinners - most of whom were left-armers (Peate, Peel, Rhodes, White, Verity, Wardle, Lock, Underwood) - date from the days when wickets in this country were uncovered. In the days since wickets in England have been covered, only subcontinental fingerspinners (Bedi, Prasanna, Kumble, Harbhajan Singh, the aforementioned Iqbal and Saqlain) have ever enjoyed much sustained succes. There hasn't been a genuinely successful Australian fingerspinner for many decades, and there's only ever been one from South Africa (Tayfield) and one from West Indies (Gibbs), both of whom are also a long time ago now.

In modern times the only bowlers who've enjoyed widespread success Worldwide have been wristspinners - Muttiah Muralitharan and Shane Warne. And if anyone thinks there's likely to be another one of those two any time soon they're asking rather a lot.
I disagree. The second best spin bowler in NZ (that never gets a god damn game for the national side) is this guy Bruce Martin | Cricket Players and Officials | Cricinfo.com

He's a left arm spinner, and though he's had a bad trot recently, he is head and shoulders ahead of Patel and McCullum.

The most promising young spinner is also slow left arm-Nick Beard.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I think we're being a little too exclusive in our definitions of "test class" here; to my way of thinking a guy like Benaud with very nearly 250 test scalps at a tick over 27 comfortably fits that definition. Even if he was Chris Martinesque with the bat he'd be in any current test line up: fact.

You could argue he perhaps isn't an all-time great (although his batting and captaincy must lift him bloody close to it), but he's test class, surely?
 

andyc

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think we're being a little too exclusive in our definitions of "test class" here; to my way of thinking a guy like Benaud with very nearly 250 test scalps at a tick over 27 comfortably fits that definition. Even if he was Chris Martinesque with the bat he'd be in any current test line up: fact.

You could argue he perhaps isn't an all-time great (although his batting and captaincy must lift him bloody close to it), but he's test class, surely?
Yeah, agree. Reckon you could make a case for there being 15 or so good Test standard right arm wrist spinners, for which there should surely be at least one decent left handed wristie, yet AFAIK there isn't.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think we're being a little too exclusive in our definitions of "test class" here; to my way of thinking a guy like Benaud with very nearly 250 test scalps at a tick over 27 comfortably fits that definition. Even if he was Chris Martinesque with the bat he'd be in any current test line up: fact.

You could argue he perhaps isn't an all-time great (although his batting and captaincy must lift him bloody close to it), but he's test class, surely?
Yep, he is more than just 'test class' is easily in the 'very good' category.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I disagree. The second best spin bowler in NZ (that never gets a god damn game for the national side) is this guy Bruce Martin | Cricket Players and Officials | Cricinfo.com

He's a left arm spinner, and though he's had a bad trot recently, he is head and shoulders ahead of Patel and McCullum.

The most promising young spinner is also slow left arm-Nick Beard.
I'm not suggesting no spinner can have success in domestic cricket because there are a few grounds in England which routinely produce spin-friendly decks. I don't know a thing about New Zealand domestic cricket really so there might or might not be for all I know, but if there are in England, there certainly could be in New Zealand.

But there are not and have not been during my lifetime an abundance of spin-friendly Test decks in either England or New Zealand and that is not going to change any time soon.
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I think we're being a little too exclusive in our definitions of "test class" here; to my way of thinking a guy like Benaud with very nearly 250 test scalps at a tick over 27 comfortably fits that definition.
Like so many people Benaud's career average does not tell very much about him. Benaud was an average bowler for a while, then he (and Alan Davidson at the same time for that matter) suddenly made the transition to excellence. Both then had a few years of real excellence - Benaud averaged IIRR about 22, Davidson 19.

But both of them were relatively old by that time - ~29 IIRR - and so they didn't play on for very long after. Benaud, too, had declined again before he retired.

Benaud's time as a Test-class bowler was relatively short, but while it lasted he was damn sure as a superlative one, fit to rank with the Grimmetts, O'Reillys and Warnes. But the reason he's notably a class behind them (though still easily recognised as one of the really good wristspinners Australia's produced) is because his success was, relative to theirs, short-term.
 

WindieWeathers

International Regular
Wow i never expected my question to provoke such in depth debate, so what's the final verdict then? is it much harder for left-arm spinners to be successful at test level or not?.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Wow i never expected my question to provoke such in depth debate, so what's the final verdict then? is it much harder for left-arm spinners to be successful at test level or not?.
I wouldn't say so.

It's hard for spinners, period. Given that 1 out of 10 people in the population is left handed, the lack of really good left hand spinners (in the long form anyway) isn't something to be overly concerned about.
 

Top