Posts
Loading ...Looks like the list only contains names of players that have been in retirement for 3 years or more!
Bradman and Hammond in Twenty20s
By Will 4 months ago Leave a comment on this post
Nick Hoult has drawn up a list of his dream Twenty20 side at his enjoyable Telegraph blog:
1. Gordon Greenidge - Destructive and intimidating opener who would set the tone for the innings.
2. Saeed Anwar - Clever placement and electrifying stroke play would combine to make a brutal opening partnership with Greenidge.
3. Donald Bradman - Simply can’t ignore the greatest player of all time.
4. Viv Richards - Awesome power at the crease and useful bowling.
5. Wally Hammond - Wally loved to score quickly and his seam up would be invaluable. Also a great team man.
6. Garry Sobers - The game’s greatest allrounder. His stroke play would make him useful in the middle overs while his mixture of seam and spin could adapt to any situation.
7. Alec Stewart - Only Gilchrist has bettered him as a wicketkeeper/batsman.
8. Malcolm Marshall - Swing bowling and a decent leg-cutter would be perfect for Twenty20 cricket, as would his lower order hitting.
9. Wasim Akram - One of the great one-day bowlers whose lightening fast action concealed a clever change of pace.
10. Derek Underwood - Slow bowlers are key in Twenty20. Deadly’s intelligent left arm spin/medium pace would make him a captain’s dream.
11. Abdul Qadir - A gamble as he could be hit out of the attack, but his ability to produce the unpredictable could change a match.
Coach: Douglas Jardine - A man strong enough to handle a dressing room full of greats as well as get up the noses of the opposition and media.
I like the Anwar/Greenidge opening partnership - and just look at that bowling attack! Deadly Derek and Qadir to mop up after Marshall and Akram’s explosive opening couple of overs. I’d have Gilchrist instead of the Gaffer though, as much as it pains me…
Tags: abdul-qadir, alec-stewart, donald-bradman, fantasy team, gordon greenidge, saeed-anwar, twenty20, Wally-Hammond |
17 Responses to “Bradman and Hammond in Twenty20s”
March 6th, 2008 at 7.53 pm
March 6th, 2008 at 11.28 pm
One can only wonder how the sentence “Only Gilchrist has bettered him as a wicketkeeper/batsman” doesn’t mean Gilchrist is the better player…
March 7th, 2008 at 1.58 am
Did Bradman ever hit a six? He’s famous for always hitting along the ground. If he can’t hit a six, how much good would he be in Twenty20? (And what about his scoring rate, too)? What was “great” 70-80 years ago in Tests may not be suitable to today’s Twenty20 game.
March 7th, 2008 at 5.43 am
According to some research by statistician Charles Davis in teh 2004 Australia Wisden, Bradman’s overall SR was 60- fantastic by today’s standards, and you’d think someone who can pick the gap tima and again for four would be very handy. Ironically, Hammond’s SR was only 45, yet he has the repuatation for being a faster scorer. And from what I’ve heard of him, he didn’t get along too well with Bradman, so I’m not sure where “great team man” comes in.
But someone really worth considering is Vic Trumper, with his SR of 67 impressive enough by today’s standards, but phenominal on the types of pitches and bowling around 80, 90 years ago.
March 7th, 2008 at 6.08 am
One wonders why Shane Warne should not be replacing Underwood. Why Brian Lara should not be in the side. And why Gilly, having betterd and BATTERED one and all, should not be the opener?? Anwar’s exploits are largely on subcontinent flat-tracks and esp in Sharjah . Gilly’s inclusion also opens up a space for Kapil Dev/Imran Khan- both destructive batsmen and amazing bowlers under any conditions.
I havent suggested Sachin because it seems that we have to stick only with retired players
March 7th, 2008 at 6.21 am
Oh , and rather than reading a lot of posts on a test match between two of the world’s most boring test sides ( with glorious exceptions of Freddie and Pietersen), lets hear your take on recently concluded CB series and Aussies
March 7th, 2008 at 6.34 am
Personally, I’d like Ian Smith in there. Ian Smith, Gilbert Jessop, Brian Statham and Mike Proctor.
And Hammond was a fine slip catcher, but how would he cope saving ones in the circle? He would, after all, be 105 years old…
March 7th, 2008 at 8.46 am
Smuthy! That’s a bit left field Mr Liew. I like the idea of Statham though; Statham and Trueman in tandem. What a spectacle.
March 7th, 2008 at 10.23 am
Nice one, Jonathon. Reminds me of the story of when Tendulkar and Warne had dinner at Don Bradman’s house, and Tendulkar asked him what he thought he’d average if he were playing in the current day.
“About 70.”
“Why only 70?”
“Because I’m 90, and 70’s not bad for a 90-year-old man.”
March 7th, 2008 at 10.38 am
alec stewart??? ahem! i might let him carry their boots.
couldn’t we employ a premiership-style squad rotation and have barrie richards, ranji, hedley verity and a young botham or kapil dev? 20 20 cricket is about entertainment as well as brilliance.
and why not phil tufnell - the side as is would give the crowd nobody to mock - they are all gods… maybe that’s why the gaffer was in there!
March 7th, 2008 at 11.32 am
Even Stewart’s mother wouldn’t pick him before Gilly in a Twenty20 game. Underwood before Warne? I don’t think so.
March 7th, 2008 at 11.59 am
No..seriously, why not Brian lara instead of Hammond? Gilly in place of Saeed Anwar? And Stewart replaced by Kapil Dev? With Underwood making way for Shane Warne
March 7th, 2008 at 5.08 pm
Bradman never hit sixes because he reasoned that it wasn’t worth the chance of getting out for the extra 2 runs. He played by the numbers.
He did, on one occasion though, decide to have a slog in a state match and hit 10 or so in an innings. So he could do it when we wanted to, he just didn’t want to.
March 7th, 2008 at 11.58 pm
Yes, of course, Yobbo, Bradman could do anything if he wanted to. He was a saint as well 
Reminds me of a comment in the SMH Letters a few weeks ago, from a Bradman devotee, complaining about the modern cricketers’ self-serving and tasteless ventures into TV advertising. Bradman, he assured us, would never lower himself to such crassness. In fact, Bradman happily advertised petrol and Peters’ Ice-cream in the 30’s and was an astute businessman. He was always good at promoting himself, but was not well liked by many of his team, who called him elitist and self-absorbed. Perhaps he just wasn’t a sociable type, but he was not considered a team man by his contemporaries - in those days. Now, of course, any true picture of this icon’s character has long since been buried by the legend.
March 8th, 2008 at 9.35 am
Agree with Jonathan Liew - Gilbert Jessop to open.
Sometimes he got out early, but so far as I know he is the only batsman ever to have a TEST strike rate of around 112. If he got in for five overs, the game would be finished. Also a brilliant cover fielder and an outstanding fast bowler. How he got left out I do not know. Not as great as Hammond perhaps, but definitely the one for this list.
March 8th, 2008 at 9.45 am
That reference to strike rates for Jessop can be found here:
http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/england/content/story/142892.html
March 10th, 2008 at 5.05 pm
Whatever Steve. Bradman actually said as much about hitting sixes when he was still playing. He said he didn’t see the point of it.
Don’t forget that for a fair part of his career, tests were still untimed, run rate was not usually an issue.
It’s not that I’m looking at Bradman through Rose colored glasses, it’s true that he hit over 10 sixes in a single innings for NSW and it’s also true that he only ever hit 6 sixes in his 28 year test career.
So obviously he was just really unlucky at never getting bad balls in test cricket, or he deliberately avoided hitting sixes. Take your pick.
Comments
« England Under-19s’ crossbar challenge | Main | England aren’t kidding anyone »
