First Class "Bunnies"

[Line and Length]

At all levels of cricket we have seen batting "bunnies" - players whose bowling is often the sole reason for them getting a game.

In this day and age, bowlers are expected to at least hold an end up and, for this reason, Glenn McGrath doesn't qualify under the requirements listed below.

To be named, a player must have played at least 100 first class games, 10 or more which were Test matches and in those games they must have taken more wickets than they scored runs. ('Pigeon' misses out as his improved batting later in his career gave him 977 FC runs to his 835 wickets).

Here are 3 classic "bunnies" to start things off.

Alf Valentine: 125 FC games and 36 Tests. Took 475 wickets @ 26.2 and scored 470 runs @ 5.0

Bill Bowes: 372 FC games and 15 Tests. Took 1639 wickets @ 16.8 and scored 1531 runs @ 8.6

Eric Hollies: 515 FC games and 13 Tests. Took 2323 wickets @ 20.9 and scored 1673 runs @ 5.0

I'm sure our members will contribute the names and stats of a few more worthy "bunnies".

Footnote: Why would anyone suggest such a perverse thread? I once scored an "Aldi" and only narrowly avoided an "Olympics". Confused? Check the two logos!

 

[Daemon]

Chris Martin is the obvious one

192 FC and 71 Tests. 599 wickets and 479 runs

 

[Starfighter]

I remember posting a lengthy list of these recently. Don't remember where though.

Hopper Read and Alf Hall (both interwar) averaged 3.67 and 3.71 and had 158 runs and 219 wickets and 134 runs and 234 wickets respectively. According to Wikipedia (may be wrong) Read's average is the lowest of any test player. Chandra has the worst ratio 600 runs and 1063 wickets.

 

[Line and Length]

Chris Martin is the obvious one

192 FC and 71 Tests. 599 wickets and 479 runs

Good one Daemon. 599 @ 31.8 and 479 @ 3.7

 

[Line and Length]

I remember posting a lengthy list of these recently. Don't remember where though.

Hopper Read and Alf Hall (both interwar) averaged 3.67 and 3.71 and had 158 runs and 219 wickets and 134 runs and 234 wickets respectively. According to Wikipedia (may be wrong) Read's average is the lowest of any test player. Chandra has the worst ratio 600 runs and 1063 wickets.

Sorry if I'm replicating something you posted previously, but, as a newcomer I haven't got beyond threads that have had their latest post prior to this year.

Both Read or Hall and hall were definite bunnies but neither filled the 100 FC games and 10 Test qualifications I mentioned. They played 54 FC and 1 Test and 46 FC and 7 Tests respectively.

On the other hand, B.S.Chandrasekhar definitely fits the bill:

246 FC games and 58 Tests. 1063 wickets @ 24.0 and 600 runs @ 4.6

Both he and Chris Martin trump my trio!

 

[Athlai]

Trent Boult is pretty awesome in that he has a great eye but seems to forget how to bat between deliveries. You always think he's going to either get out or smash something over the boundary. There's nothing in between.

Yet at the same time it isn't typically mindless slogging. He's trying to bat.

 

[ataraxia]

Neil Adcock just misses out; 451 runs at 5.5 and 405 wickets.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Well short of the threshold but Sheeno Berridge has a pretty impressive FC record with the stick: 19 runs at 1, highest score of 4. Fares marginally better in 50 over cricket where his average hits the dizzying heights of 1.33

The hero we deserve

 

[tony p]

great topic.

for longevity of career, HOLLIES is definitely the one. other stats on his hopeless batting include,

71 consecutive innings without reaching double figures
284 consecutive innings without reaching 20.
reached double figures only 48 times in 616 innings.


amazingly, his top score of 47, came right after those 284 consecutive innings without reaching 20,( he batted number 11 and was equal top score with his 47)

and just once he scored double figures in both innings, 11 + 18 v surrey in 1955, against an attack of laker, lock, loader & a bedser,( just getting his eye in)

a couple of other complete duffers were
jim griffiths of northants (1974-86), 188 innings with 290 runs@3.33 H.S.16, 51 noughts, 444 wkts.

and

frank mchugh of glos ( 1952-56) 111 innings, 179 runs@2.63 H.S. 18, only reached double figures 4 times in his career, 276 wkts. he certainly had hollies covered for non batting ability.

and we must not forget, BRUCE REID,
91 test runs@4.78, but 106 test wickets, although his overall first class average was a massive 9.20, just couldn't score test runs

 

[honestbharani]

Trent Boult is pretty awesome in that he has a great eye but seems to forget how to bat between deliveries. You always think he's going to either get out or smash something over the boundary. There's nothing in between.

Yet at the same time it isn't typically mindless slogging. He's trying to bat.

Remember when Dhoni shouted out to Kuldeep about Boult for I think it was the last ball of the over and it was his first ball. He said in Hindi "aankh bandh karke rukhega" (will close his eyes and defend the ball) and told him he can bowl a googly from around the wicket and he will nick it. Kuldeep got him out as he played the exact stroke Dhoni predicted.

 

[mr_mister]

For me an interesting batting bunny is Bert Strudwick, certainly seen by many as in the argument for greatest wicket-keeper ever. Did most of his test batting at 10-11, averaged 7.9 from 42 test innings, averaged a slightly more impressive 10.9 from 835 FC innings(but no centuries and only 9 fifties) but really the most interesting part about this is that he was a keeper not a bowler. Nearly all keepers, even back then, at least were expected to bat at 7-8 in a test side and be able to put up some resistance even if they were never expected to to pass 50 regularly like they are now in the post-Gilchrist world. His opposite number in many tests, Bert Oldfield, was far more capable.

Interesting player.

 

[AndrewB]

David Larter: 10 Tests, 16 runs @ 3.20 and 37 wickets @ 25.43; FC 639 runs @ 6.08 and 666 wickets @ 19.53

Jim Higgs qualifies at the FC level (384 runs @ 5.40, 399 wickets @ 29.66), but in Tests he scored more runs (111) than he took wickets (66). Ewan Chatfield is similar (587w, 582r in FC, but 180r, 123w in Tests).

Jasprit Bumrah would qualify but is a long way short of 100 FC matches.

 

[AndrewB]

Some others who miss out on one or other (or both) of the "matches played" criteria are Alf Hall and Norman Gordon (pre-war S African bowlers), Cuan McCarthy (SA in the 50s) and Charles Marriott (played once for England in the 30s).

Ernie Toshack likewise didn't play 100 FC matches, and he also scored more Test runs than he took Test wickets.

 

[social]

Times have certainly changed

I reckon every Oz tailender including Lyon has the ability to score a first grade ton

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Some others who miss out on one or other (or both) of the "matches played" criteria are Alf Hall and Norman Gordon (pre-war S African bowlers), Cuan McCarthy (SA in the 50s) and Charles Marriott (played once for England in the 30s).

Ernie Toshack likewise didn't play 100 FC matches, and he also scored more Test runs than he took Test wickets.

Norman Gordon may not have had much batting ability in his career, but he did make 103 in the innings of life

 

[honestbharani]

Times have certainly changed

I reckon every Oz tailender including Lyon has the ability to score a first grade ton

Really? Hazlewood?