longtom
School Boy/Girl Captain
I am with you ....Jacques Kallis
Graeme Pollock
Dudley Nourse
Three years down the line Amla might be a threat for any of them .....
I am with you ....Jacques Kallis
Graeme Pollock
Dudley Nourse
He's certainly making a case for it. Won't be able to ignore him if he ever hits 30 test centuries.Three years down the line Amla might be a threat for any of them .....
Personall cannot rate Pollock ahead of (in order) Tendulkar, Headley, Lara, Chappell, Ponting or Hammond. Played on about four years in a strong team and managed to miss all of the great Aussie bowlers, didn't play againts the Indian Spinner or the Windies pacers at all. Also unlike Richards didn't get to perform in WSC and didn't perform that well for the Rest of the World Teams. Similar career in length and performance to Colin Croft (who doesn't get the credit he is due).Yeh, fair enough.
I'd generally agree with you. But the stories told about Barry Richards and Graeme Pollock are amazing. At the moment I'd have G.Pollock in my all time world test XI at #4, and B. Richards isn't far off displacing Sunny.
J. Hobbs
S. Gavaskar
D. Bradman
G. Pollock
V. Richards
G. Sobers
A. Knott
W. Akram
M. Marshall
S. Warne
D. Lillee
So you don't rate Pollock so highly as he missed playing all the great bowlers, yet didn't Headley score a lot of his runs against weaker attacks than the one's that could've been fielded at the time?Personall cannot rate Pollock ahead of (in order) Tendulkar, Headley, Lara, Chappell, Ponting or Hammond. Played on about four years in a strong team and managed to miss all of the great Aussie bowlers, didn't play againts the Indian Spinner or the Windies pacers at all. Also unlike Richards didn't get to perform in WSC and didn't perform that well for the Rest of the World Teams. Similar career in length and performance to Colin Croft (who doesn't get the credit he is due).
Akram is just the most over rated player in cricket.
Back on topic.
Agree that Amla by the time he is done will take over one of these positions.
Headley's last tour of England was in 1939, and he averaged 60-odd in three Tests. That's not approaching Bradman's level, and as Bradman was still active Headley wasn't the best player in the world.Didn't say he wasn't an ATG.
With regard to Headley and Pollock, Pollock played Test cricket for approx 4 year, Headley up until the War, 10 years. Pollock was part of the best team in the world, Headley was the sole hope in a very vey team and especially the batting order. Compare Headley's pre war record againts England with that of Bradman's and they are not that far apart with the only bowler that Headley didn't face was Larwood and Larwood was only effective vs Australia in one series. Additionally the one series didn't send their full strength team the attack was still better than the South African and New Zealand attacks that Bradman plundered. In fact the two Lord Tennyson touring teams that Headley played againts were superior to the N.Z. and S.A squads. Headley played againts the only two strong teams of the era with Grimmett calling him the best onside played he had bowled to after struggling in that area to start the tour, unfortunately he never got the chance to play Australia again. In his last tour to England he was approaching Bradmans level and was totally dominat and really in his prime. He was the best player in the world and if not run out in his last innings he record may have been even better. Headley also has the third highest first class average in history mostly made vs almost test level touring teams and while touring England and Australia. Yes I rate Headley higher than Pollock, he was the the W.I team and scoed 10 centuries in his first 19 tests iut of a total of 22 for the team. He sciredd them againts Verity, Allen, Grimmett, Ironmonger, Rhodes ect. He was Atlas and the original and the best W.I. batsman
Sorry it was Sourh Africa and India where Bradman averaged 201 and , 178 respectively.Headley's last tour of England was in 1939, and he averaged 60-odd in three Tests. That's not approaching Bradman's level, and as Bradman was still active Headley wasn't the best player in the world.
Bradman never played New Zealand. God knows what he might have averaged if he had.
And I do think it's a little disingenuous to just list the English bowlers each man faced and conclude that the English attacks Headley encountered were as strong - or nearly as strong - as the ones Bradman did, particularly at home. The teams England sent to Australia in those days were generally considerably stronger than the ones they sent to the Caribbean.
I do agree, however, with the one-man army act Headley had to play for almost the entirety of his career, and placing Headley above Pollock in all-time batting rankings.
+1allan donald
dale steyn