tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post6596772012231521152..comments2024-02-11T10:15:25.794+00:00Comments on Third Umpire: Greatest Test XITimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09215417891130654291noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-15793802873414993472007-10-10T21:11:00.000+01:002007-10-10T21:11:00.000+01:00Tim makes a very good point about Gavaskar. He was...Tim makes a very good point about Gavaskar. He was a great opening batsman, and one of the best of all time. But his record isn't as impressive against the West Indies as it appears, as he rarely played against the full 4-pronged pace attack. That isn't his fault (as he can only play against whoever shows up), but it shouldn't be used to show he was the best player of pace bowling.Stuarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08864747766699243728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-9040915901394578522007-09-27T17:47:00.000+01:002007-09-27T17:47:00.000+01:00Fair enough VM. I am not denying it was a very, ve...Fair enough VM. I am not denying it was a very, very tough choice.<BR/><BR/>All I will say is that, in terms of Hobbs, he has come to be associated with the 'golden age' and also of archetypal English values. Finally, he was more exciting to watch - these do not make him a better play, but they help explain why he has been more talked about.<BR/><BR/>Regarding Gavaskar, he was another great although his record against the West Indies is slightly deceptive as, in 70/71 and during WSC they were bereft of quality quicks.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09215417891130654291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-71239191782318930852007-09-13T16:32:00.000+01:002007-09-13T16:32:00.000+01:00ok so call me closed-minded. But nothing you ever ...ok so call me closed-minded. But nothing you ever say will convince me that Hobbs and Gavaskar should not be considered the 2 supreme opening batsment of the 20th (or 19th, or 21st) century. You hold it against Ponsford that the fact he is not as well-known today as some of his conteporaries must count for something. I do not disagree with that. But then - which name is better-known today, Hobbs or Sutcliffe? As for Gavaskar - shw me the opening batsman in history who you judge would have done better against the greatest era of fast bowling in the history of the game. Remember, there was not just the incomparable West Indies side, but also Imran Khan, Richard Hadlee, Dennis Lillee... ah forget it, why am I even wasting my valuable time. Pick who you like - your credibility is shot to pieces anyway, at least in my book!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-62644079704186244652007-08-26T12:18:00.000+01:002007-08-26T12:18:00.000+01:00Another make-over? You chaps certainly get bored e...<I> Another </I>make-over? You chaps certainly get bored easily. It's no wonder you like twenty20 so much.The Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314238450779293325noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-70738511992954571522007-08-25T17:51:00.000+01:002007-08-25T17:51:00.000+01:00Cheers arun; its is odd that Hobbs achieved so man...Cheers arun; its is odd that Hobbs achieved so many votes for the Wisden Five Cricketers of The Century, although he was more than a sportsman.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I'll soon reveal whether the second opener is Hobbs, Hutton or Gavaskar.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09215417891130654291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37251922.post-41535672194733581022007-08-25T08:15:00.000+01:002007-08-25T08:15:00.000+01:00I second that; Sutcliffe was unquestionably one of...I second that; Sutcliffe was unquestionably one of the greatest opening batsmen ever but unfortunately spent all his career in Hobbs' shadow. In fact, Sutcliffe has saved or helped to win more tests for England than Hobbs. Since 1979 I have read countless books and articles about the "Hobbs & Sutcliffe" phenomenon and a lot of critics are of the opinion that Sutcliffe was unfairly second-judged because of the larger then life character of his senior partner. It was simply the sign of those times; Hobbs was already a batting hero whose career was interrupted by WW1; when cricket restarted after the war, England needed their sporting heroes and Hobbs was there; fair enough, but that should not have been a reason to relegate an equally talented (some, including me, would say even more so) player like Sutcliffe to an 'also ran' - a legacy that should never have been but nevertheless festers even to this day.<BR/><BR/>Having said all that, I personally chose Len Hutton for the No:1 batting spot in my own all time greatest XI. He seems to combine all the virtues of Hobbs & Sutcliffe in one person.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com