CW decides the greatest test spinner ever. 43 names: Countdown/Rankings thread

[Bolo]

#10th. Richie Benaud, 293 points

Featured on 27 of 35 lists
Highest finish: 3rd (1 time)
Ranking within spin discipline: 5th of 16 (Leg Break Googly)
Test WPM ranking: 24th of 43 (3.97)


One of the greatest all-rounders, captains and commentators. Also one of the best spinners ever and considered by CW to be the 5th best leggie to grace the game. Obviously a great cricket analyst and deep thinker, his bowling was said to contain a lot of 'baits and traps'. Benaud had an amazing away average of 24 and with the help of conditions in Asia took 71 wickets there from 12 tests @ 19. He averaged 30 at home. Against Sobers, Weekes, Worrell et all he averaged 26.9, very similar to his overall test bowling average of 27.04. Very respectable numbers for a leggie. He only gave away 2.10 runs an over.

He played a decent chunk of his tests against England, 27 in fact. He did pretty well against them at home but in England he averaged 39 from 12 tests with only 25 wickets, the one blight on his record.

He retired with the most test wickets for Australia with 248. Only 2 aussie spinners have surpassed this number in the next half century of cricket, one being Nathan Lyon not too long ago. Richie had a slow start to his career, but from 1956 to 1959 he took 124 wickets from 24 tests @ just 21. A tremendous peak for a spinner.

What is this one of the greatest allrounders line? I read the same thing years ago when I first heard of him. So I looked up his page profile. I saw his stats. Bowling average significantly above batting average. Not an allrounder, or if you want to be generous, an ar but obviously far from the greatest. Then his batting average, low 20s. Obviously not an allrounder at all. Got annoyed by hyperbole, closed page. He became overrated in my mind, and his mediocre ar stats morphed into him being a mediocre player. Forgot everything about him except this for a number of years. If I heard about him I just ignored it.
Eventually had another look. Got a bit of a surprise. So, I spent years thinking one of the world's greatest spinners was total junk based on 30 seconds of viewing stats and some horrible hyperbole.

 

[Borges]

I think he is classified as an allrounder based on his performance in first class cricket.
His bating average suffered a lot more than his bowling average when he played test matches.

 

[Slifer]

Playing of pace bowling however has improved. Don't thinh a West Indian quartet will intimidate the **** out of many teams like it used to be.

It really hasn't. All WI have to do is prepare a Sabina pitch of old and no matter what, batsmen will be scampering for survival.

 

[SeamUp]

Regarding spinners. A lot of us were taught it is important to have quick feet both back and forward to spin. Also getting large strides and playing bat and pad.

Now with DRS you play a lot more out in front of you as a batsmen and it really is increased the threat of good spin bowling I feel.

How do we evaluate this for batsmen in modern cricket ? For example how much tougher is it for non sub-continental batsmen as opposed to the past. I'm sure there are many other questions to be asked about this topic. Interesting debate I think it was Atherton who briefly brought it up in the 2nd or 3rd test.

 

[srbhkshk]

It really hasn't. All WI have to do is prepare a Sabina pitch of old and no matter what, batsmen will be scampering for survival.

Agree, I don't think the standards are better against Good bowling of any kind - Spin , Swing or Bounce. Johnson terrorized the whole English team by himself - I refuse to believe that the WI Quartet wouldn't be able to do that.

It's just that the number of times batsman have to face such bowling has reduced, so they are better at maximizing how many runs they can get against relatively pliant bowling. The older guys wouldn't be able to maintain the strike rate of current batsman on a batting friendly pitch.

 

[Borges]

With DRS, the techniques of spin bowlers have also evolved; perhaps at a more rapid rate than those of the batsmen.
I think we would have to give it a few more years, before we can see the full effects of DRS on technique; essentially wait for younger coaching staff to come into cricket.

 

[Engle]

What is this one of the greatest allrounders line? I read the same thing years ago when I first heard of him. So I looked up his page profile. I saw his stats. Bowling average significantly above batting average. Not an allrounder, or if you want to be gs

A more accurate depiction could be " One of the greatest All-round cricketers..." considering his contribution to all facets of the game.
And quite frankly, I don't understand why All-Rounders should be limited to batting and bowling only - whilst the more important aspect of captaincy is ignored.

 

[SeamUp]

With DRS, the techniques of spin bowlers have also evolved; perhaps at a more rapid rate than those of the batsmen.
I think we would have to give it a few more years, before we can see the full effects of DRS on technique; essentially wait for younger coaching staff to come into cricket.

Interesting to see if those are coaches whose only up-bringing is of DRS or who are young enough to adapt from early up-bringing pre-DRS. Honestly think it is a fascinating topic. You also got to think at junior level where you learn the game the most you don't come across DRS.

 

[Borges]

You also got to think at junior level where you learn the game the most you don't come across DRS.

I think this may change quite quickly over the coming years. At least with ball tracking, at the frame rates that are currently in use, the technology itself is quite inexpensive.

 

[Howe_zat]

I think he is classified as an allrounder based on his performance in first class cricket.
His bating average suffered a lot more than his bowling average when he played test matches.

That and the fact that average is nothing to do with whether or not you're an allrounder, because your role in the side isn't defined by how successful you were at it.

Benaud's batting was good enough to get him a ton batting at 4*, and he batted at 6-8 in the majority of his innings (#7 the most common). Allrounder, no question.

*Aus were obviously playing a weird order here for some reason, but at absolute worst he'd bat six in that team

 

[Maximas]

13th. Rangana Herath, 226 points

However it's not all positive reading. His overall average is a tick under 28, no doubt helped by playing three quarters of his test cricket in Asia where he averages 25. In several parts of the world he's failed to make an impact, averaging over 40 in 5 separate countries. I personally feel this is a bit of a mark against the man and think he may have slighted benefited from being such a fan favorite on CW in this exercise. But there is a lot to love about a 38 year old stocky man running through sides on a regular basis.

I almost felt he was at his best on the SA, Australian and English tours of about 2012-2014, while his average over this period probably balloons a bit (haven't checked) the guy was the only person in the attack who could effectively defend or attack in the whole bowling unit, and he did so in unfamiliar and unsuited conditions.

 

[vic_orthdox]

People could kick away spinners far more in pre-DRS days. The game has changed and made spin a lot more effective, in whatever the conditions.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Interesting to see if those are coaches whose only up-bringing is of DRS or who are young enough to adapt from early up-bringing pre-DRS. Honestly think it is a fascinating topic. You also got to think at junior level where you learn the game the most you don't come across DRS.

I genuinely think that a large part of the reason why batsmen suck against spin these days is that even the coaches have no idea how to properly deal with spin + DRS since many of the older techniques would b almost useless today. Even the very very best players of spin like Lara and Sachin used to use their pads quite a bit to safely kick balls away on the occasions where they weren't stepping out of the crease. You don't see enough batsmen play spin predominantly off the backfoot to spin although that may again be because of DRS making that a more dangerous option than before.

 

[Migara]

Is there any batting technique at all that can hold up against variable bounce? It's just a lottery.

Short back lift and playing late is one way to go. That will make booming drives difficult to play.

 

[Migara]

Agree, I don't think the standards are better against Good bowling of any kind - Spin , Swing or Bounce. Johnson terrorized the whole English team by himself - I refuse to believe that the WI Quartet wouldn't be able to do that.

It's just that the number of times batsman have to face such bowling has reduced, so they are better at maximizing how many runs they can get against relatively pliant bowling. The older guys wouldn't be able to maintain the strike rate of current batsman on a batting friendly pitch.

Modern bowlers are faster than that of old. Quickest ones may not be, but the supporting cast has well and truely improved in pace and hostility. Even teams like Bangladesh field bowlers who can touch 90mph. With helmets, batsmen don't have to be worried of pulling the ball in front of their fact. Gone are the days of back and across and pull. Now they pull on front foot, balls on and outside off, and ones heading between their eyes. Now that is taking out intimidation factor.

 

[Engle]

Just follow the 20-40 rule to determine whether a Test player possesses the minimum criteria to qualify as an AR

If he averages 20+ with the bat and captures 40+ wickets with the ball, then he passes the minimum test of being classified as an AR

 

[morgieb]

Just follow the 20-40 rule to determine whether a Test player possesses the minimum criteria to qualify as an AR

If he averages 20+ with the bat and captures 40+ wickets with the ball, then he passes the minimum test of being classified as an AR

Would you count someone that took 40 wickets in 140 Tests as an all-rounder, though?

 

[the big bambino]

Modern bowlers are faster than that of old. Quickest ones may not be, but the supporting cast has well and truely improved in pace and hostility. Even teams like Bangladesh field bowlers who can touch 90mph.

Mustafizur.

 

[stephen]

Would you count someone that took 40 wickets in 140 Tests as an all-rounder, though?

Yes.

On this forum we tend to only talk about all rounders as being players who average >30 with the bat and <30 with the ball. But in the real world, Starc is considered an all rounder. The truth is that most teams have (or try to have) an all rounder at 8. Most all rounders average around 20 with the bat and 30 with the ball.

Similarly, batting all rounders often average in the 40s with the bat and the same with the ball. And most get maybe 5 overs per match.

Benaud himself called Johnson an all rounder despite him averaging around 25 with the bat.

Kallis and Imran are exceedingly rare players who come along very infrequently. Most all rounders are batsmen who roll the arm over or bowlers who can bat a bit.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Wasn't Mortaza genuinely quick when he first came along? Obviously he isn't now that his knees are more metal than bone, but I tend to remember he could really get it through once upon a time.

Modern bowlers are faster than that of old. Quickest ones may not be, but the supporting cast has well and truely improved in pace and hostility. Even teams like Bangladesh field bowlers who can touch 90mph.

Know I already posted it in the Aus domestic thread, but here in South Australia that just isn't true