Procter below 7 is great depthSouth Africa had amazing batting depth around the time they were banned for apartheid with Trevor Goddard, Denis Lindsay and Mike Proctor at 7, 8, 9.
SA vs AUS, Australia tour of South Africa 1969/70, 3rd Test at Johannesburg, February 19 - 24, 1970 - Full Scorecard
Get cricket scorecard of 3rd Test, SA vs AUS, Australia tour of South Africa 1969/70 at New Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg dated February 19 - 24, 1970.www.espncricinfo.com
They did bat very deep (Lindsay, Procter, Peter Pollock at 8/9/10 in that Test), but Goddard was an opener - that one innings at 9 is his only time outside the top 5 in 41 Tests.South Africa had amazing batting depth around the time they were banned for apartheid with Trevor Goddard, Denis Lindsay and Mike Proctor at 7, 8, 9.
They all played in all 4 Tests in 1999, but in the 1st Test they were batting 6-9, with Doull and Allott 10 and 11.Nz in the late 90s. Had a 7 to 10 of Cairns, Parare, Nash, Vettori. With Doull at 11, the first choice. Not sure how many times all played together, but 1st test v England 1999 definitely did. In the Manchester test of that series Chris Harris played instead if a seamer so had Vettori at 11. (Of course, Vettori at that point not yet the allrounder he became, but he was on his way)
Not as strong as SA of the same era, though, if they had Klusener playing.
You try telling that to this England tail: https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...-vs-new-zealand-4th-test-63844/full-scorecardMost tails are good at home.
This combination only ever played one match for South Africa, but has to have been the deepest batting line up ever.Did SA in 90s have strongest lower order ?
I think it makes more sense to quote career stats rather than series stats as evidence of a strong tail, as strong series batting stats could just be a result of a weak bowling attack. Admittedly most of those players did indeed have strong career batting stats for positions 8-11.They did bat very deep (Lindsay, Procter, Peter Pollock at 8/9/10 in that Test), but Goddard was an opener - that one innings at 9 is his only time outside the top 5 in 41 Tests.
Australia in 1924-5 had a strong tail: Kelleway (252@28), Gregory (224@25), Oldfield (291@41), Mailey (129@18) was the usual 8-11.
That's a pretty stupid side to pick though. Test cricket isn't just about making big scores, it's also about bowling the opposition out and winning matches. That side has eleven good batsmen but only one top class bowler, even though South Africa had others available for selection at that time.This combination only ever played one match for South Africa, but has to have been the deepest batting line up ever.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series...vs-south-africa-3rd-test-63780/full-scorecard
was there ever woakes-scurran-rashid-broad? i feel there were some tests were rashid was batting down at ten or eleven at some pointEngland's best lower order is from about 10 years ago when they had Swann at 10 batting behind Bresnan and Broad. The best I can find on paper is the one we had for the Bangladesh tour in 2016 which had Woakes, Rashid, Batty and Broad making an 8-11 with 20 odd first class hundreds between them. Didn't make many runs in those tests though.
Scurran-Rashid would have only overlapped during the 2018 home series against India, and off the top of my head we had Anderson in all four tests.was there ever woakes-scurran-rashid-broad? i feel there were some tests were rashid was batting down at ten or eleven at some point