Greatest English Spinner

[sayon basak]

Not necessarily always. Laker yes, but others not so much. And like, Ramadhin is fine but the 2nd was literally Wilf Ferguson. Not to mention after the first WI tour of his, both his captain (Hutton) and selectors lost confidence on him performing away.

Yeah, that applies 3× for Ashwin.

 

[Johan]

also, Hutton lost confidence in both Trueman and Laker but both proved him wrong in Australia, looks like Hutton was just... wrong.

 

[capt_Luffy]

also, Hutton lost confidence in both Trueman and Laker but both proved him wrong in Australia, looks like Hutton was just... wrong.

Not necessarily. Laker and Trueman both had rather alright performances in Australia, neither really set the stage on fire there.

 

[sayon basak]

also, Hutton lost confidence in both Trueman and Laker but both proved him wrong in Australia, looks like Hutton was just... wrong.

And if Johan is saying that, it must be true.

 

[Johan]

Not necessarily. Laker and Trueman both had rather alright performances in Australia, neither really set the stage on fire there.

Trueman literally won a game for England in Australia in 62-63 lol, in a flat series and the only game they won that tour.

 

[sayon basak]

Not necessarily. Laker and Trueman both had rather alright performances in Australia, neither really set the stage on fire there.

Answer this.

@capt_Luffy you rate Lyon over Underwood???

 

[capt_Luffy]

Trueman literally won a game for England in Australia in 62-63 lol, in a flat series and the only game they won that tour.

And pretty much did nothing else?? Comeon now, Trueman's away record is plain average.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Answer this.

Yes

 

[Johan]

And pretty much did nothing else?? Comeon now, Trueman's away record is plain average.

outbowled everyone in the series bar Davo and contributed heavily to the single win England got, also was pivotal to the windies series win in 1960, thus proving Hutton wrong on both accounts

 

[Johan]

Yes

bruh

 

[capt_Luffy]

outbowled everyone in the series bar Davo and contributed heavily to the single win England got, also was pivotal to the windies series win in 1960, thus proving Hutton wrong on both accounts

Again, both good series but nothing Great. Just like Laker in Australia and WI (in all 3 series a spinner outbowled him)

 

[Johan]

Again, both good series but nothing Great. Just like Laker in Australia and WI (in all 3 series a spinner outbowled him)

we can debate semantic and the greatness of the tours all we want, the bottom line is, Hutton assumed Trueman and Laker will have zero success away from home and shouldn't be picked away, He was proven wrong on both fronts.

 

[capt_Luffy]

we can debate semantic and the greatness of the tours all we want, the bottom line is, Hutton assumed Trueman and Laker will have zero success away from home and shouldn't be picked away, He was proven wrong on both fronts.

Zero success is a stress, he thought Wardle and Appleyard were better away than Laker and Lock (proven right to an extent) and Statham and Tyson were than a young Trueman and an old Bedser (again, in the right next Ashes, he was right. Here Tyson had the best Ashes quite easily and Statham and Trueman are identical in WI and Australia)

 

[Johan]

Zero success is a stress, he thought Wardle and Appleyard were better away than Laker and Lock (proven right to an extent) and Statham and Tyson were than a young Trueman and an old Bedser (again, in the right next Ashes, he was right. Here Tyson had the best Ashes quite easily and Statham and Trueman are identical in WI and Australia)

He thought they shouldn't be picked for away tours, period. Trueman outbowled Statham in Australia and actually won them a series in Windies which matters more than what Statham did in West Indies, Wardle also has identical numbers to Laker in Australia and inferior ones in West Indies and superior ones in South Africa, the latter being achieved after Hutton had retired. simply put, Hutton was proven wrong, and you don't need to pick an argument with me to see that.

 

[capt_Luffy]

He thought they shouldn't be picked for away tours, period. Trueman outbowled Statham in Australia and actually won them a series in Windies which matters more than what Statham did in West Indies, Wardle also has identical numbers to Laker in Australia and inferior ones in West Indies and superior ones in South Africa, the latter being achieved after Hutton had retired. simply put, Hutton was proven wrong, and you don't need to pick an argument with me to see that.

Like.... How?? Wardle is better than Laker in Australia (Laker's was more spin friendly, Benaud took 27), is much worse in WI and is levels better in SA (Laker's that SA tour was very bad in context). Away Wardle is better than Laker. Re Trueman and Statham, both overall are equalish in WI and Trueman slightly ahead in Australia. No way there's much between those two there.

 

[Johan]

Like.... How?? Wardle is better than Laker in Australia (Laker's was more spin friendly, Benaud took 27), is much worse in WI and is levels better in SA (Laker's that SA tour was very bad in context). Away Wardle is better than Laker. Re Trueman and Statham, both overall are equalish in WI and Trueman slightly ahead in Australia. No way there's much between those two there.

there's quite a bit between those two away from home, Statham never contributed to a series win in West Indies nor was the best bowler there in any series. funny you mention context considering Trueman bowled on far flatter Aussie pitches than Statham and still outperforms him. both Wardle and Laker got bowler friendly pitches in Australia (unlike Fred) and their output isn't far.

so basically

The Argument: Hutton argued that Laker and Trueman shouldn't be picked for away tours.

The Actuality: Trueman was the best English bowler in a flat Ashes (35.2 RPW) and won a test in Australia, also was the decisive factor for a series win in West Indies in years. Laker did reasonably well in both West Indies and Australia, better than Wardle in one venue, worse in one, and relative at worst in one venue. thus, both proving they were more than good enough to be picked for away tours.

The Conclusion: Hutton's assessment after the 1954 west indies tour, was incorrect.

 

[sledger]

Giles

 

[capt_Luffy]

there's quite a bit between those two away from home, Statham never contributed to a series win in West Indies nor was the best bowler there in any series. funny you mention context considering Trueman bowled on far flatter Aussie pitches than Statham and still outperforms him. both Wardle and Laker got bowler friendly pitches in Australia (unlike Fred) and their output isn't far.

so basically

The Argument: Hutton argued that Laker and Trueman shouldn't be picked for away tours.

The Actuality: Trueman was the best English bowler in a flat Ashes (35.2 RPW) and won a test in Australia, also was the decisive factor for a series win in West Indies in years. Laker did reasonably well in both West Indies and Australia, better than Wardle in one venue, worse in one, and relative at worst in one venue. thus, both proving they were more than good enough to be picked for away tours.

The Conclusion: Hutton's assessment after the 1954 west indies tour, was incorrect.

I am bored

 

[Johan]

I am bored

me too, doesn't mean I'm not gonna jump you for Lyon overrating tho

 

[Migara]

Laker. Don't think there is much debate.

The second greatest English spinner would be interesting