Why do England struggle to produce undisputedly great players?

[Howe_zat]

JimmyA is a lot like Sanga.

They both benefit from having been exposed to International cricket while raw and young and being able to grow and develop from that.

They both then evolved into cricketers that were absolutely world class and worthy of ATG status.

But to truly appreciate how great they are, you have to look past the first phase of their careers - JimmyA as the young, raw, wayward, injury prone quick and Sanga as the wicketkeeper who could bat decently.

But then you are faced with a paradox - if it weren't for their first phase of their careers, you wouldn't have the second phase of their careers. Therefore, is it fair to just use the second phase of their careers to justify their ATG status?

Zak probably suffers from this a bit too. Sandwiched between a raw start and a injury ridden end he was quite superb - from his comeback vs SA in 2006 to the 2012 tour vs Australia he had 167 wickets @ 28.47. But had it not been for the start, he would not have made the move to Worcestershire and grown into the bowler he was for that window of time. And sure he carried on a bit too long, but should we ignore that?

Nah if Jimmy were the bowling equivalent of Sanga he'd average low 30s up to 2008 or so and then end up averaging 24 overall. Sanga was still a quality player when he was a keeper-batsman and would have played for most sides in the world. Anderson was in and out of the team and at one point was considered a one day specialist.

A better comparison might be someone like Martin Crowe whose relatively modest mid-40s average is usually tempered by ignoring his dodgy first 20-ish tests or by pointing out how good he looked on song.

 

[honestbharani]

Yep.. nail on the head from Jono.. Anderson to me is in the in-between between very good and great.

 

[Adders]

Yep.. nail on the head from Jono.. Anderson to me is in the in-between between very good and great.

Jono specifically said ATG though.........I don't think anyone is suggesting that Jimmy is that.

My contention is that he is "great" by my definition anyway.

 

[Jono]

***** literally said ATG status

 

[Adders]

OK, well yeah......nah.

 

[Adders]

Just looking at the list of top test wicket takers. There are a No of ATG's on the list and IMO anyway the top 30 (with maybe a few exceptions) would all be considered "great"

Jimmy's No 6 FFS.........I don't care how many tests he' splayed you don't get there without being a Great.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Just looking at the list of top test wicket takers. There are a No of ATG's on the list and IMO anyway the top 30 (with maybe a few exceptions) would all be considered "great"

Jimmy's No 6 FFS.........I don't care how many tests he' splayed you don't get there without being a Great.

Would you call Harbhajan a great? Genuine question.

 

[Howe_zat]

A thought: Great players get to retire when they want. If they're still playing well they get a big farewell party like S Waugh. If they're not then they still earned the right to pick the end to their career like Ponting. Good, long-term players like Harbhajan don't get that, they get dropped when they're no longer good enough.

Anderson, ftr, will retire when he wants.

 

[Adders]

Would you call Harbhajan a great? Genuine question.

LOL, must admit he was one of the names that did make me add my "with maybe a few exceptions" disclaimer. But you know what I do think I would class him in that bracket. Can't say I watched a whole heap of his career and I know he was bog ordinary for a part of it......but he was also pretty amazing when he was good.

Plus he ticks my box for being great because he used to wind the Aussies up so much.

 

[Daemon]

A thought: Great players get to retire when they want. If they're still playing well they get a big farewell party like S Waugh. If they're not then they still earned the right to pick the end to their career like Ponting. Good, long-term players like Harbhajan don't get that, they get dropped when they're no longer good enough.

Anderson, ftr, will retire when he wants.

Chanderpaul

 

[OverratedSanity]

Lara was forced into retirement by the wicb too.

 

[harsh.ag]

A thought: Great players get to retire when they want. If they're still playing well they get a big farewell party like S Waugh. If they're not then they still earned the right to pick the end to their career like Ponting. Good, long-term players like Harbhajan don't get that, they get dropped when they're no longer good enough.

Anderson, ftr, will retire when he wants.

That just depends on the competition, Howe. Some of the great Windies bowlers had to make way for the competition.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Would you call Harbhajan a great? Genuine question.

A bit like Saqlain he was a great for a period of time in the early part of his career. The drop off though from the early player to the latter player is huge and is the spin bowling version of Waqar and his drop off.

 

[Howe_zat]

Is it better to have the good bit at the beginning or the end of a career?

 

[Adders]

End for sure.

Nothing worse than persevering with a player hoping they will reproduce past magic.

Edit:

Mind you that assumes that the bad bit is not so bad that they don't get to have an end.

 

[mr_mister]

I would say end coz it gives you a far better reputation

 

[Howe_zat]

Related: If Harbhajan had retired in 2005 with 200 wickets at 27 in order to become a marketing consultant or something, that wouldn't make him a better cricketer, surely

 

[flibbertyjibber]

He'd be seen now as a great though if he had. That is why the drop off and him remaining in the side was so surprising.

Not picking on those players I mentioned as England did the exact same thing with Botham in the 80's. Does his pathetic end to his career mean he wasn't an exceptional player at his peak?

 

[SeamUp]

I think Anderson has more chance of making it as a great than Cook.

You watched Gary Kirsten's career and you know you can consider him a great because as an opener he was one of the best around in an era when fast-bowling was tops and he then went on to face the top spinners the game has seen & did fairly well but the main objective was scoring hundreds and seeing out the new ball v the quicks. He was the first test player to score hundreds against all test nations which then was followed by S.Waugh and Tendulkar.

Just moments I remember besides his double hundreds but I remember his twin centuries in India at Eden Gardens I think when Gibbs/Klusener made their test debuts.

Also this knock in a time when the SCG favoured spin and MacGill/Warne made many teams suffer. I also always remember McGrath saying he would target Gazza because of the respect the Australian tema had for him.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I remember his twin centuries in India at Eden Gardens I think when Gibbs/Klusener made their test debuts.

Yeah that was a fantastic perforce. Right up there with some of Cook's innings in 2012.