• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Keith Miller vs Michael Atherton

Who is the better test batsman?

  • Total voters
    25
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
Stewart averaged 44 in the top three and 46 in the top three when he wasn't burdened by the gloves. Think he's the only opener who sustained an average of 40+ throughout the 90s against WI. Possibly helped by a lack of those games coming in Asia though. England in the 90s were poor, but they had two good openers.
 
Last edited:
BazBall21

BazBall21

International Captain
Flem274* said:
Never has a guy who averaged 37 been so overhyped.

Obviously a good player and his average is harsh, but to say he faced the highest level of bowling ever is both contentious and ignoring all the other ****s who opened in the 90s.

I'm all for the openers tax but there's a limit.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying he's a great player because he definitely isn't. But the reason why he's hyped more than anyone else with an average of 37 (post-war) is simply because it's likely he faced stronger bowling than anyone else with an average of 37. There's also a little bit more to it than just 90s tax which in isolation is quite simplistic. All 90s openers had it very tough, but Atherton's opposition schedule was particularly tough if you look at it in detail.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

International Coach
BazBall21 said:
I'm not saying he's a great player because he definitely isn't. But the reason why he's hyped more than anyone else with an average of 37 (post-war) is simply because it's likely he faced stronger bowling than anyone else with an average of 37. There's a also a little bit more to it than just 90s tax which in isolation is quite simplistic. All 90s openers had it very tough, but Atherton's opposition schedule was particularly tough if you look at it in detail.
Click to expand...
Pretty straight forward tbh

The era, the openers tax, and didn't have England to boost his average against.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top