cricket_icon
International Cricketer
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2011
GOOD DISCUSSION. And I don't believe taking Bang/Zimb out of analysis is the right way to go. As people have said earlier, there were weak teams around when the likes of Hobbs and so on were playing. To judge players over their careers as openers should include all teams but I do not mind a cut off of runs or matches, because that makes sense. You can't have someone playing 5 tests, averaging over 50 and then comparing him to Gavaskar and co.
Anyway, onto the main point, Test openers is right up there as one of the toughest jobs in Test cricket but number 3s often face similar problems as do high quality fast bowlers in very tough conditions, which only makes the achievements of the likes of Akram, Younis and Khan even more amazing.
----------
On the matter of the English bowling attack, it is very good compared to current attacks but sadly that isn't saying much. We have seen these same bowlers fail outside of England (yes yes I did see the Ashes but 1 series isn't enough) and we all saw what happened in limited overs in the WC. SAs attack is the only one I would call truly world beating.
Anyway, onto the main point, Test openers is right up there as one of the toughest jobs in Test cricket but number 3s often face similar problems as do high quality fast bowlers in very tough conditions, which only makes the achievements of the likes of Akram, Younis and Khan even more amazing.
----------
On the matter of the English bowling attack, it is very good compared to current attacks but sadly that isn't saying much. We have seen these same bowlers fail outside of England (yes yes I did see the Ashes but 1 series isn't enough) and we all saw what happened in limited overs in the WC. SAs attack is the only one I would call truly world beating.