Keith Miller
Tests: 55
Runs: 2958
Ave: 36.9
Wkts: 170
Ave: 22.97
With Botham in the house and my need for an all-rounder seemingly low, I looked at the names before me. I found a couple of very good fast bowlers and Keith Miller as the best options. And then it hit me, Miller was almost as good a bowler as the other 2 AND he could crack 100s - so really it's a simple choice when thought of that way. Plus he's an Aussie and a top bloke
A little about him: Tall right hand batsman and right arm fast bowler. At first Miller's powerful middle order batting was his main strength, but Bradman used him for Australia as a fast bowler. He had an excellent action and would bowl off long or short runs according to how he felt, with plenty of bouncers
Sometimes he slipped in leg breaks or offies. And he was often described as a brilliant fielder with the knack of making things happen.
He finished his career with a batting average around 14 higher than his bowling average - virtually equal with Imran Khan, putting him equal 3rd on that table. His first class record was even better, averaging 48 with bat and 22 with ball for a huge 26 run difference. I'm not sure if that's a record or not, but it can't be far off.
The fact that he batted at 5 and opened the bowling on a strong team shows how much talent he had - none of the other great all-rounders did this. Imran, Botham, Kapil Dev all batted lower, Sobers and Kallis didn't open the bowling. And while Miller's stats are good, but probably not as good as they should have been with that kind of ability.
Cricinfo did a study of all-rounders who batted in the top 5 recently (
The List: Allrounders who bat in the top five and bowl a sizeable number of overs), and Miller's bowling stats dwarf his other top order competitors. Sure Sobers and Kallis have taken more wickets but at much higher averages. Miller's batting average of course isn't as good as it could be for a top 5 player, but that's why he's getting demoted to #6
History also tells that he never played for stats either, often throwing his wicket away after getting to 100, and in one tour match just letting himself get bowled because it was too one sided to be interesting for him. This is rumoured to be why Bradman and Miller had rifts due to their different approaches. Bradman was a stat producing machine, while Miller played with his heart and sometimes not his head.
And there's a great article on Keith Miller here by David Frith if you want a better description of the superstar Keith Miller, rather than just stats to tell the story (
David Frith on Keith Miller). Miller really was a rock star after the war, and will make my team even more alluring.
Victor Trumper
Tests: 48
Runs: 3163
Ave: 39.04
HS: 214* vs SA, Adelaide Oval, 1910/11
Another one for the romantics
Trumper's fairly ordinary batting record undermines his stature: he was a giant of the golden age. Trumper is generally regarded as the greatest Australian batsman of his era, and some would say any era. It was the style and grace of his batting which appealed. He had all the shots, and played them regularly.
There's some great stories about Trumper and his endearing approach to cricket. There's a couple of good cricinfo articles, like this one:
Blithe spirit
His most famous innings was at Old Trafford on a soft wicket. The sun was coming out, so the England bowlers plan was to keep him quiet til lunch when the pitch would start getting sticky. But Trumper scored 104 before lunch - the first man to ever do so, and Australia won by 3 runs.
Oh and you might recognise the pic. as "Trumper jumping out to drive" is one of cricket's most famous photos.
But anyway, I think Ranji's a pretty exciting talent: a guy from a far away country inventing new ways to play and original shots - he blew people away with his talent at the time from what I've read.
And I really, really want to make my pick now.
