wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
He timed it pretty well in terms of reaching number 1 in 1973. I think Lillee was injured, and the next batch of the 1970s uber-quicks (Thomson, Roberts and Holding) hadn't played yet. Snow had an iffy few years after the 1970/71 Ashes; missed much of 1971 for disciplinary reasons, did OK in the 1972 Ashes but tanked badly in our 1973 series for some reason. Plus Arnold actually went to India in 1972/73 and did reasonably well. Then of course, you have the SA bowlers of that era who weren't able to play test cricket. Without checking, I'd guess that the next best ranked quicks were the WI not-as good- as what-followed generation of Boyce, Julien and Holder. But I think they'd only had one good series (in England, naturally) by the end of 1973. Sarfraz may have been there of thereabouts too, but I think he came along a year or two later. Imran and Hadlee had played a few tests but were very young indeed. So not a golden age for bowlers, but Arnold was a reasonable performer.Geoff Arnold.
A little before my time & probably a wee bit too good for the thread (115 test wickets at a tick over 28), but I was put in mind of him doing one of those Sporcle quizzes yesterday.
It was "Name the year end No.1 ranked test bowlers" from 1946 to 2020. I got 72/76, missing Bill Voce in 46, Hugh Tayfield in 55 & 57 (both of whom I maybe should've got) and dear old Horse (GG Arnold, you see? GG: Horse, nevermind…) in 73 (well, he was equal top with Bishen Bedi, anyway), who I never would've got in far longer than the 10 minutes given.
When one thinks of some of the names never to achieve this (Holding, Walsh, Wasim, Snow & Statham, to name but a few) I was a little surprised, but fair play to him.
Good effort getting 72 out of 76 btw.