Best English Batsman Since 1990?

[gettingbetter]

I've always found it odd that many nations have had batsmen who average above 50 of recent times but England haven't had one (bar KP and he still has a long way to go to maintain his average). Even Zimbabwe have a cricketer who averaged above 50. In saying that, the likes of Atherton, Gatting, Hussain, Stewart and co are held in high esteem both in their homeland and away, so please enlighten me.

Also, I don;t have a clear criteria, but someone who has debuted in the 70s, but played a a significant amount of their career in the 90s can be accepted.

 

[James90]

Always rated Thorpe but I think that Pietersen is well on the way.

 

[weldone]

G. Thorpe

 

[Goughy]

Gooch

Averaged over 50 in 45 Tests in the 90s and played some of the best innings Ive ever seen.

For 2nd. Robin Smith. Loved watching him play and despite his flaws against spin he took on the quicks and had a healthy average. Unfortunately another to be thown aside into the messed around bucket with Hick and Ramprakash.

 

[NUFAN]

Graham Thorpe for mine.

 

[Richard]

Gooch was the one who started the decade and no-one has matched his sensational performances since. Averaged 61 in 64 innings between January 1990 and June 1994, scoring runs off good and bad bowling alike, with a few let-offs (most notably More in the 333) but not many.

Some have played more innings (Thorpe played 179), but none have had such a long period doing so sensationally well. Never at any point in his career was Thorpe as good as Gooch was 1990-1994, though he did come fairly close for a handful of Tests in 2003 and 2004 (against overall much inferior bowling). And no-one else, really, comes close to Gooch or Thorpe. If spin-bowling had never been invented, Robin Smith probably would, mind.

 

[gettingbetter]

Where does the highly respected Atherton come into the equation?

 

[NUFAN]

Where does the highly respected Atherton come into the equation?

5th to 7th.

Behind Thorpe, Gooch, Pietersen, Gower.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Gower hardly played post-1990, tbf.

I know it's not quite what the thread asks, but here's the list of the most productive England batsmen of the 1990s:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...career.html?class=1;id=199;team=1;type=decade

Gooch out on his own in that decade, clearly.

 

[NUFAN]

Gower hardly played post-1990, tbf.

I know it's not quite what the thread asks, but here's the list of the most productive England batsmen of the 1990s:

http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine...career.html?class=1;id=199;team=1;type=decade

Gooch out on his own in that decade, clearly.

He played 11 Tests and averaged 53. not many English players have batted better..

 

[Richard]

5th to 7th.

Behind Thorpe, Gooch, Pietersen, Gower.

Nah, Gower hardly played in the 1990s. Just 3 Tests against India in 1990, 5 in Australia in 1990\91 and 3 against Pakistan in 1992.

Would probably have Atherton 3rd, after Gooch and Thorpe. That's if we have the "don't assess a batsman 'til the end of his career method" on Cook, Bell and Pietersen.

I'd be happier if it was to be "best English batsman since 1990 whose career is over" TBH.

And Alec Stewart is so difficult to assess, as he was badly mucked-around between 1990 and 1996. He was keeping one minute, then he wasn't, he was opening, he was batting six, he was doing this that and everything. One thing he wasn't was doing the same thing for a long time. Think he actually deserves a separate thread, been meaning to do that for ages actually.

 

[gettingbetter]

Any chance a mod can change it to 1995 or post Gooch, I didn't think that Gooch played/was so prosperous post 1990.

 

[Richard]

Easy enough to just say "excluding Graham Gooch" IMO, TBH.

But yeah, Gooch's sensational batting in the early 1990s is famous, how can you not have heard of 't? He was THE man when I was getting into the game, only person I ever wanted to be (ahead of Brian McClair, Steve Bruce et al).

 

[NUFAN]

Nah, Gower hardly played in the 1990s. Just 3 Tests against India in 1990, 5 in Australia in 1990\91 and 3 against Pakistan in 1992.

Would probably have Atherton 3rd, after Gooch and Thorpe. That's if we have the "don't assess a batsman 'til the end of his career method" on Cook, Bell and Pietersen.

I'd be happier if it was to be "best English batsman since 1990 whose career is over" TBH.

And Alec Stewart is so difficult to assess, as he was badly mucked-around between 1990 and 1996. He was keeping one minute, then he wasn't, he was opening, he was batting six, he was doing this that and everything. One thing he wasn't was doing the same thing for a long time. Think he actually deserves a separate thread, been meaning to do that for ages actually.

Why would you not include players who haven't finished there careers?

Fair enough if you all don't want to include Gower, but where would you pick him??

 

[weldone]

Gooch was the one who started the decade and no-one has matched his sensational performances since. Averaged 61 in 64 innings between January 1990 and June 1994, scoring runs off good and bad bowling alike, with a few let-offs (most notably More in the 333) but not many.

Some have played more innings (Thorpe played 179), but none have had such a long period doing so sensationally well. Never at any point in his career was Thorpe as good as Gooch was 1990-1994, though he did come fairly close for a handful of Tests in 2003 and 2004 (against overall much inferior bowling). And no-one else, really, comes close to Gooch or Thorpe. If spin-bowling had never been invented, Robin Smith probably would, mind.

Ya surely post 1990, Gooch's performance was better than Thorpe; no doubt about that. But overall, probably Thorpe will be a touch over Gooch.

 

[Richard]

Why would you not include players who haven't finished there careers?

Because that could change within a year. And will change, as their careers go on. Only when nothing more can be added am I completely happy to make an assessment.

Fair enough if you all don't want to include Gower, but where would you pick him??

Where'd I pick Gower? I wouldn't, not if "since 1990" was the criteria. I'd only pick those who played "a decent" (no exact number) of innings.

 

[NUFAN]

Because that could change within a year. And will change, as their careers go on. Only when nothing more can be added am I completely happy to make an assessment.

Where'd I pick Gower? I wouldn't, not if "since 1990" was the criteria. I'd only pick those who played "a decent" (no exact number) of innings.

OK. If for instance a player was nearing the end of his career like a Habibul Bashar, Chaminda Vaas player would you then include them in a list of the best batsmen since 1990? Seems a bit unfair that a player who's had a brilliant career and still JUST going, wouldn't be recognized.

Tomato/Tomatoes (probably easier to get if this were audio).

 

[gettingbetter]

Easy enough to just say "excluding Graham Gooch" IMO, TBH.

But yeah, Gooch's sensational batting in the early 1990s is famous, how can you not have heard of 't? He was THE man when I was getting into the game, only person I ever wanted to be (ahead of Brian McClair, Steve Bruce et al).

I do recall him scoring the twin tons against India and also the 92 WC, though that has nothing to do with Tests. But I mainly didn't assume he would be so prolific is because he was above nearing 40 and subsequently, the end of his career.

 

[Richard]

OK. If for instance a player was nearing the end of his career like a Habibul Bashar, Chaminda Vaas player would you then include them in a list of the best batsmen since 1990? Seems a bit unfair that a player who's had a brilliant career and still JUST going, wouldn't be recognized.

Tomato/Tomatoes (probably easier to get if this were audio).

Neither Habibul Bashar or Chaminda Vaas were either among the best batsmen since 1990 nor nearing the end of their career at any time early in the 1990s. What's your point?

It's really nothing to do with beginning \ end of careers anyway, simply amount of contribution. If it was "best batsman before 2000" I'd not include Michael Vaughan either, because he only played about 4 innings before the turn of the century. Nor has it anything to do with being brilliant and playing lots in the past, I'm only interested in playing a lot in the time in question. Gower, simply, didn't. And how good he was beforehand really doesn't factor in.

 

[Richard]

I do recall him scoring the twin tons against India and also the 92 WC, though that has nothing to do with Tests. But I mainly didn't assume he would be so prolific is because he was above nearing 40 and subsequently, the end of his career.

Gooch contravened the normal ageing traits more than most. He was better near the end of his career than he'd ever been before. Averaged 39 between 1978 and 1988, and, as I say, over 60 at the start of the 1990s. A truly remarkable case.