Who do you take?

So you're the selector and have to pick from one of the following for your team. Who do you pick?

Each of these guys played from the mid 70s to the early 90s and had a similar length of tenure in the Test arena.
I haven't included their domestic records as I think their Test match stats provide enough data for debate.

You have the flashy often wayward playboy Thommo, the honest ever-stretching toiler Merv, the sometimes fiery Hogg and the man with the mouth Lawson.

Each has their positive attributes, as well as a few other ones.

Thommo struck fear into batsmen and clearly the fastest of the 4.
Merv gave great service and reliability to a bowling attack and probably the best sledger of the 4!
Hogg had a break-out debut against the Poms but didn't play as many tests as the others.
Lawson who also can sledge with the best, and has the best "5 and 10 for" records - something that Ian Chappell held in high esteem in his bowlers.

Jeff Thompson
Tests 51
Wickets 200
Ave 28.0
SR 52.6
5 for: 8
10 for: 0
Econ 3.18

Swervin Mervin Hughes
Tests 53
Wickets 212
Ave 28.38
SR 57.9
5 for: 7
10 for: 1
Econ 2.93

Rodney Hogg
Tests 38
Wickets 123
Ave 28.47
SR 62.0
5 for: 6
10 for: 2
Econ 2.75

Geoff Lawson
Tests 46
Wickets 180
Ave 30.56
SR 61.7
5 for: 11
10 for: 2
Econ 2.96

Each of these guys were probably the number 1 Australian bowler in their generation for only a smaller portion of their career.
I guess it might come down to what you look for in a bowler.

So who do you take?

For me, no contest, I'll have Thompson, please.

Merv was a good workhorse and Lawson a good, but average Test bowler.

Hogg was better than the first two, but I saw Thompson at his best and he was frightening.

Put it another way. Ask any of the batsmen of their era and they'll 100% say they'd rather face anyone than Thompson.

Thommo, easily. He could produce a ball which would dismiss any batsman, no matter how set they were at the time. He just tore the 1974-75 Ashes series and the 1975-76 Frank Worrall trophy apart. Most devastating quick I've seen.

Pity his shoulder was never 100% after running into Alan Turner at Adelaide Oval. Even with a bung shoulder and lack of match fitness, he was still able to win the quickest bowler in the world title in Perth during WSC.

Greg Chappell once said if Thommo had worked as hard on his game as Deniis Lillee, he would have taken 500-600 Test wickets.

And guys ... it's spelt Thomson .... no "p".

People rarely talk about Bruce Reid, the lanky WA left armer, which is a great pity. On his day he was a devastating match winner with his ability to extract lift from a good length and take the ball away from the bat at the last moment. If it wasn't for a series of crippling injuries, he would have been rated one of the great quick bowlers in Australian history.

I've often salivated at the thought of an Aussie attack of Lillee, Thomson, Reid and Warne. Even an attack of Lillee, Thomson, McGrath and Warne ... could you imagine that? Australia would never get beaten

1 Thommo
2 Swervin Mervin
3 Hoggy
4 Henry

On their best days , no doubt , Thommo was the best

OK it seems all the score cards are in.
I don't disagree with anyone here, but the stats don't put Tommo (clearly ahead of the others).

I saw him too and remember that 74-75 series like yesterday.

But the question I have, is why weren't his stats better?
Why didn't he have an average sub-25?

I accept AH's explanation that the shoulder injury had a big effect on his career and that could be the answer.

As for other bowlers - I didn't give you those.

These guys were similar in their stats in a lot of respects.

Maybe this one was easy - I don't know.
I'll give you a harder one next time.

Is it purely intimidation factor here? IMO the fact that Thommo could bowl a ball at 100 clicks would give him a scary reputation.

I'd have Merv for the sledging, it'd keep me entertained whilst fielding!

Statistically, they look all the same, but it's that X-factor that they bring to the game that would make the difference.

I was a big fan of Hoggy.

Just another name to add to the list. Big Carl Rackemann. I rated him very highly, he had very good pace and an ability to create troublesome lift which made him a very difficult customer to handle.

Ray Bright
Bruce Yardley
Tim May
Peter Taylor

Who to select?

I'm not a big fan of left arm orthodox spinners in 1st class cricket, but Ray Bright was an exception. He was a very talented cricketer who was playing for Victoria in his teens. Unfortunately WSC, and his constant exposure to the world's most dangerous batsmen, meant his loop deserted him as he developed a flatter style of delivery to prevent being belted out of the park. He was never the same bowler after WSC, pity.

Yardley was an exciting spinner with an unorthodox grip and on his day could be highly effective. He revamped himself from an uneffective medium pacer to a very good spin bowler. Could really rip the ball ... uncommon among off spinners who didn't button their sleeves at the wrists and bowl the doosra.

Tim May was the most skilful of the quartet, and for a while teamed up with Shane Warne to great effect. Had an annoying habit of bowling no balls because his back foot planted dangerously close to the front line and his front foot would plonk down next to it.

Peter Taylor, "WHO?", came from nowhere to be a very effective spinner for the green and gold, a match winner in his first Test. He was probably to first spinner to became effective in truncated forms of the game.

It's a tough call to make. I think it would depend upon the makeup of the rest of Austraia's attack, who they were playing, and on what conditions.

I'll go for Ashley Mallett

FOOTYfollower wrote:Ray Bright
Bruce Yardley
Tim May
Peter Taylor

Who to select?

Possibly Tim May as the best bowler
Without doubt the best batsman to watch of this quartet was Bruce Yardley
He could frustrate , like few others could, with his cavalier batting approach

Peter Taylor could hold up an end from memory and wasn't a mug as a batsman

One spin bowler I didn't include in the 4 optipns was Jim Higgs. I recall years ago when I was very young, there was talk of how he basically had no idea at all when it came to batting, made a lot of ducks I think.

Tony Greig
Ian Botham

Who would you select ?

Hard to split these 2 , they are the best allrounders Ive seen from England
I reckon Tony Greig was the better overall batsman
I reckon that Ian Botham was a better bowler
My assumption is that maybe Grieg played more against better oppositions
Botham was impacting in the Test matches in the Kerry Packer era
Grieg played for KP, and also did have to face guys like Lillie and Thommo in Test matches , prior to that
Botham eventually got to play against the better players when the KP players came back

I will go for Botham, marginally, he was more of a match winner

Tony Grieg
Tests
3599 runs
40.43 ave
8 tons
141 wickets @32.2

Ian Botham
Tests
5200 runs
33.54 ave
14 tons
383 wickets @28.40

Those figures would suggest Grieg as being more consistent batsman
And perhaps Botham being more devastating on his day with the bat
I would have Grieg was the better batsman
Ian Botham was a better bowler , more the match winner on his day

Botham for me as he had an "x factor" about him.
Agree he was a match winner.

Who do you take
Ian Chappell, Greg Chappell
or
Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh

I have not included other siblings Trevor Chappell and Dean Waugh

Both families very talented

Ian Chappell and Steve Waugh were both pugnacious batters
Greg Chappell and Mark Waugh were both glorious batters , and sensational fieldsman

I will choose the Chappells as the better family

I agree, the Chappells, but not a huge amount between the 2 options.

Ian's cricket nous is probably the swaying factor.

Test cricket I would choose the Chappells
ODI cricket I would actually go for the Waughs


TESTS
Greg Chappell is well ahead of the Waughs as batsmen
For this reason the Chappells are in my opinion a better combo

ODI
Steve for part of his career was the elite allrounder
Mark was a brilliant opening batsman , handy bowler and an exquisite fielder
Greg was a very good ODI player, Ian didnt play enough ODIs to form a concise opinion
For those reasons I give the Waughs the nod , and not because of underarm bowling

CAPTAINS
Agree with Footy Follower
Ian without a shadow of doubt, his captaincy is prob worth an extra 2-3 runs on his Test Cricket batting average

FIELDING
Mark Waugh and Greg Chappell were freaks , and perhaps could be the best 2 Australian fielders of all time, they were that good
Ian Chappell was one of the safest slip catchers Ive seen
Steve Waugh was a good fielder

Yes, the Chappell's narrowly for me.

as you have mentioned the word family i'd suggest if it were close the name Vic Richardson gets the Chappell family over the line

Yes I would agree with all of these sentiments. And not just because Ian Chappell was my boyhood idol.

Steve Waugh definitely inherited a very good team from Tubby.
He was no slouch as a captain, but probably not quite as flairy as Chappelli.

Greg Chappell beats Mark Waugh any day as a batsman.
And I think probably beats Steve too as a batsman.

I do respect what Steve Waugh did as a batsman. The better he got as a bat seemed to consign his bowling to the back burner.

I remember a one day game prior to Steve Waugh becoming captain and even before he had cemented his spot in the side, where he took a catch at long on running backwards and completed the catch as he was about to go behind the sight screen. I reckon that was one of the best classic catches I have seen.

Anyway, Chappells for mine.

Who would you take as a Cricket Commentator from both families ?

I will leave Steve Waugh out of the discussion , as has never been a regular commentator
Of the others
Greg Chappell , passable
Ian Chappell , yes I enjoy his yarns from the old days , and does well in general
Mark Waugh , is perhaps the best Ive come across of any commentators
He is forthright , honest, entertaining , witty, sarcastic and his insights are fantastic
Judging by his comments, I reckon he would have been an excellent First Class captain

To be honest I've really only ever heard Chappelli, so it's a bit hard to say.

I didn't mind Greg Chappell when he was at channel 9, although he was only there for a year or 2 I think.