Found Trueman and Harvey the hardest to split, but went with Trueman over, as he seems to suffer the less in the matchup:
So you really do find the bowlers to be transcendent level talents. Interesting.
Greats players will do at least good enough regardless of the era imho.
Dunno exactly off the top of my head. Somewhere in the 10-15ish range maybe breaking into the 10?
Dang, so you rate the bowlers at the top above most of the batsmen also. Interesting...
Would expect them to crack the top 10 easily then, unless you don't rate these batsmen much at all, which I think you do...
There was a thread here almost a year ago where people posted their top 20 batsmen. Barrington was 14th for me. No other batsman here made it.
Dang, did Trueman do something to your family? Rating him below the otherwise universally bottom ranked Cowdrey, who honestly was in almost as something of a joke option.
I think he slept with Hoggard’s mum or Sanga’s sister or something.
What do you mean by that? And how are batters better than bowlers in Test cricket, I would have thought the opposite would generally be the case ( Bradman excepted )?
I can't word. Yes, the opposite is the intended meaning. Bowlers better than batters.
Lindwall wayyy to low.
