Aubrey Faulkner and Wilfred Rhodes would be two prominent examples, although many debate that Rhodes did not perform with bat and ball at the same time, so he is not as much of an option to some. I would have loved to have seen how a pure spinning bowling lineup would have faired- Benaud, Warne, Grimmett and O'Reilly in one team would be viewing heaven.
Welcome to the forum Mark
I would much prefer to watch spinners operate than most quicks, but unfortunately you need two quicks in a team...
Traditionally yes, but O'Reilly was very familiar with opening the bowling at club level, so maybe there is a chance of playing a pure spin attack in a team- taking the chance of opening with Warne, who bowled with a higher arm action than Grimmett who was slightly round-arm. Personally I think that spin is vastly overshadowed by pace bowling because of the advent of covered wickets. If only they were willing to uncover them again, it would certainly sort the men from the boys.
The issue primarily occurring with leg spinner is the seam of the ball cutting in to the knuckle of the spinning finger, causing discomfort and preventing them from bowling long spells.
O'Reilly had an extremely unorthodox grip though, so maybe that would change things (as well as the fact he is used to opening the bowling).
Just after I posted that Macartney came to mind. Actually just came back to edit him in.
Great minds. How do you think a team with four all-time great spinners would fare? I genuinely think it'd be a huge success, especially in the modern day game.
It depends on where the game is being played. Obviously in England, South Africa or Australia they probably wouldn't do as well, however knowing the penchant of modern batsmen to plant the front foot and hit across the line, and the general struggle by many sides to play quality spin, a side with 3 ATG spinners would be near-unbeatable in almost any conditions.
I'm not so sure. India played four great spinners in the 70's with limited success.
Actually, they only played together as a bowling unit once (which surprised me!). I'd classify them as 'good' but definitely not 'great' like Grimmett and his company.
O'Reilly would be sensational except when Hutton is compiling 364 runs against him, and everyone elso is chipping in to take the team tally to 903.
This is true, and a great shame the experiment was never repeated. That once was in England in 1967 and the four of them bowled England out twice for around 500 altogether - they lost easily because their batting was so woeful that series but a few years on, when Gavaskar and Vishy were around, and had Pataudi had both eyes, they'd have had more support and I think it would have been an interesting combination
He was easily the best bowler on that pitch. Off the top of my head, he took 3/187 I believe, and no batsman was ever dominant over him during that innings. I think Fleetwood-Smith went for over 290 runs (298, once again from memory).
1/298 for Chuck, I believe. Most expensive bowling figures ever.
I just thought I'd take it in a new direction
Bob Cowper is the opening bat you need - has a surprisingly good bowling average.
Bruce Mitchell and Viv Richards also bowled a bit of spin and would also strengthen the batting.