The 606v2 Cricket Hall of Fame - Part 1

First topic message reminder :

Following on from Gregers' idea to implement our very own Hall of Fame at 606v2, here is the thread where all the deliberating will take place.

As you know, there is a Hall of Fame already set up by the ICC, though looking through it there are some names in that list which are debateable as to whether they really belong in such company. That, then, is up to us to decide. Let's make our Hall of Fame elitist in every way, ensuring that only the most worthy of candidates are elected.

I propose that we elect 30 founder members of our Hall of Fame before the voting gets underway - whose position in cricketing history we can all agree on. Remember, this Hall doesn't have to only include players but can include managers, figureheads or anyone else that we feel has had a significant impact upon the sport to deem them worthy of a place.

In order for a candidate to gain election to the Hall, they will need a yes vote of 75% or more. Anything less will see them fail to get in, although if they get between 50 and 75% of the vote they will be voted on again at a later date. Every candidate must be retired from the sport, and therefore no currently active players will be considered.

Every fortnight 5 candidates are considered. Voting deadlines and forthcoming candidates are listed at the bottom of the the stickied thread in the Honours Board section.

Forum members can nominate candidates by posting in the current thread, which is stickied in the main cricket section.

My suggestion for the inaugural 30 is as follows. It is intended that these be the 30 very best and uncontroversial inductees, so please put forward any suggestions that you may have as to possible changes to this list, before we get started. We need to get the right names in this initial 30. In no particular order:

1) Don Bradman 2) Ian Botham 3) Sydney Barnes 4) Sunil Gavaskar 5) W.G Grace 6) Jack Hobbs 7) Richard Hadlee 8) Imran Khan 9) Malcolm Marshall 10) Garfield Sobers 11) Shane Warne 12) Muttiah Muralitharan 13) Viv Richards 14) Clive Lloyd 15) Keith Miller 16) Andy Flower 17) Brian Lara 18) Bill O'Reilly 19) Wasim Akram 20) Glenn McGrath 21) Michael Holding 22) Richie Benaud 23) Adam Gilchrist 24) Allan Border 25) Curtly Ambrose 26) Dennis Lillee 27) Frank Worrell 28) Victor Trumper 29) Kapil Dev 30) Jim Laker

So, let me know your thoughts and possible changes to this 20, and then we will get on with the business of the first ten names that are up for nomination. Any questions let me know.

I personally would have Border over S Waugh.

Border was a better bat, IMO, took an average team which had been depleted by a rebel tour to South Africa and made them great again.
He also took on the West Indies quicks on, on his own on the 83 tour when he hit twin tons in one game.

Waugh was a very good bat and captain but he had M Taylor and of course Border to thank for his success.

I was actually just thinking that Border had as much of a case as Waugh for a place here. How about Rhodes back in for Waugh then?

Are people agreed on Rhodes for Waugh? And then we're done?

What about Border?

Obviously we can't fit everyone in to the inaugural 30 - unless we just plump for Border over Waugh and leave Rhodes to be elected some other time, if he is voted in?

Well, I've stated my case

Let's sleep on it.

Night fellas.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I'm not sure on that one Fists, I think Rhodes still deserves to be there for the way he revolutionised fielding (yes you always used to have the odd great fielder, but post-Rhodes fielding became much more important) so in a way he had a bigger impact on cricket in general than Worrell did.

sorry but i cannot agree with that statement that he revolutionised fielding , he was a very good athlete but a very average cricketer and i would say it was the emergence of coaches like woolmer and fletcher who placed a much greater emphasis on fitness and fielding in general rather than giving rhodes the credit for just being in the right place at the right time

as an earlier poster said there have been other exceptional fielders earlier than rhodes but they did not get the same sort of attention

Pretty good list as it now stands - tho' personally I would rate Lillee above Akram. Not sure that I would include Clive Lloyd - good bat, fieldsman and captain - but there have been better batsmen and he was captaining easily the best group of test players around at the time.

Corporal - understand your thinking about Lloyd although I would make the point that it's not necessarily easy captaining very good players and the egos that can go with them. Add to that for Lloyd, the 'political' challenges of the different West Indian islands.

I do agree with you about Lillee over Akram although poor Fists has probably been through the wringer enough over these selections ....

Would you guys suggest your argument on why Lillee should be ahead of Akram?Both have similar overall stats but Akram bowled on the roads in the Pakistan most of the time and was brilliant everywhere.Most of Lillee's success came in Australia and England.He played 3 or 4 Tests in the subcontinent and was hammered.How can you justify having a guy who bowled well in only certain parts of the world over a proven all conditions bowler,who could also bat(Test double hundred),MoM in a WC Final and a reasonably successful captain.

Even though I agree that Jayasuriya revolutionised one day batting,his record is nowhere near good enough to justify his inclusion over so many greats that have missed out.

Ok there is the final 30. Border replaces Waugh, and Lillee replaces Jayasuriya.

Surely we're all happy now?

have to say i agree with the vast majority of them, only 1 or 2 i would maybe question, but happy to have it as it is.

Dont think Lloyd should be there in all honest.Sorry mate

rich1uk wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I'm not sure on that one Fists, I think Rhodes still deserves to be there for the way he revolutionised fielding (yes you always used to have the odd great fielder, but post-Rhodes fielding became much more important) so in a way he had a bigger impact on cricket in general than Worrell did.

sorry but i cannot agree with that statement that he revolutionised fielding , he was a very good athlete but a very average cricketer and i would say it was the emergence of coaches like woolmer and fletcher who placed a much greater emphasis on fitness and fielding in general rather than giving rhodes the credit for just being in the right place at the right time

as an earlier poster said there have been other exceptional fielders earlier than rhodes but they did not get the same sort of attention

Disagree. I think Rhodes made people aware (in the professional era) of how important fielding could be, and this in turn led coaches (you quote Woolmer and Fletcher but actually the Australians led the way) to place more emphasis on fielding, even employing fielding coaches (usually from baseball). I don't think it's a case of right place right time, but more that he was a catalyst for the events to follow.

I understand the point about exceptional fielders previously, to some extent timing did play a part (namely Rhodes arrived at the start of the professional era), although of course Rhodes was much much better than anything seen previously (in absolute terms).

Fists of Fury wrote:Ok there is the final 30. Border replaces Waugh, and Lillee replaces Jayasuriya.

Surely we're all happy now?

Nope but I'll survive. I'll state the case for Waugh and Jayasuriya's inclusions when the time comes...

Good job.

Jonty could be included in the Hall of Fame at some point but he isnt top 30 material.

I genuinely do not undestand why Andy Flower is in the top 30

Waugh or Jayasuriya over him

Maybe Waugh but Jayasuriya over Flower?No way.
His record is nothing more than OK.He might have revolutionised one day batting.But similarly,Flower has done a lot for Zimbabwean and English cricket.Plus he has a much better record.
So Flower>>>>Jayasuriya(by a mile)

Good work Fists

Will get the first 10 names for voting up at the weekend, most likely.

Fists - as is pretty much inevitable with a task like this, there might remain one or two individual quibbles. However, you are to be congratulated on leading the way in producing a list of such distinguished former players in so short a period of time.

Very well done.

Thank you very much, Guildford. Naturally it won't be to every individuals taste, but given that there are 30 names there I feel we have reached a point that everyone is at least mostly happy with, and provides a good base from which to go forward.

i know this is slightly irrevelant, but i think at the end of his career, shakib al-hasan will be labelled as a legend.

Fists of Fury wrote:Thank you very much, Guildford. Naturally it won't be to every individuals taste, but given that there are 30 names there I feel we have reached a point that everyone is at least mostly happy with, and provides a good base from which to go forward.

Yup! Well done from me as well.

Ditto - excellent list achieving a remarkable level of consensus

Right guys, it is time for our first group over whom we must deliberate and assess whether they belong in our elitist Hall of Fame. Remember, we are looking to select only the very best, or those that had a significant impact upon the sport of cricket. Ultimately, we will need a YES or a NO vote for each of the names listed, hopefully with an explanation as to why you think they should or shouldn't be included.

If you think someone should get in, really try and make a case for them. It can persuade the opinions of others, as I have noticed on the boxing Hall of Fame on several occasions. Keep in mind that a nominee requires a 75% vote in order to make it in to our Hall.

I have revised our original plan. As opposed to debating 10 names per month we will debate 5 names every fortnight, just to give us less work to do in one go when discussing our votes. Votes for this group of 5 need to be in by Friday 18th November.

I've added a little bit about each of this batch of nominees (courtesy of our good friend Wikipedia) in order to assist your choices.

The first 5 names to be considered are as follows:

Ken Barrington - Former Surrey and England batsman Barrington had a bit of a reputation for his long, defensive innings. Nevertheless, he boasted impressive averages that improved as the level of competition increased - averaging 39.87 in the County Championship, 45.63 in first class cricket, 58.67 in Test cricket and 63.96 against Australia.

His 256 in the Fourth Test at Old Trafford in 1964 is the highest post-war century for England against Australia and he has the highest Test average of any post-war England batsman. He twice made centuries in four successive Tests and was the first England batsmen to make a hundred on all six traditional Test grounds; Old Trafford, Edgbaston, Headingley, Lords, Trent Bridge and the Oval. His Test career ended when he had a heart attack in Australia in 1968, even though he had several potentially fruitful years ahead of him. From 1975 to 1981 he was an England selector and a regular tour manager.

Bishan Singh Bedi - Bedi played Test cricket for India from 1966 to 1979 and formed part of the famous Indian spin quartet. He also captained the national side in 22 Test matches. Bedi is also famous for always wearing a colourful patka and his outspoken and forthright views on cricketing matters.

In Indian domestic cricket, Bedi first played for Northern Punjab when only fifteen, having taking up cricket only two years previously, a particularly late age for this sport. He moved to Delhi in 1968–69 and in the 1974–75 season of the Ranji Trophy, he took a record 64 wickets. Bedi also represented Northamptonshire in English county cricket for many years. He finished his career with 1560 wickets in first-class cricket — more than any other Indian.

His bowling has been described as graceful, even beautiful, and full of guile and artistry. He was at expert in flighting the ball, and was capable of making it hold it back or hurry forward and added subtle variations of spin. His action was so relaxed and co-ordinated that he was able to bowl all day with rhythm and control, a great asset to any captain.

In 2008, Wisden Cricketers' Almanack named Bedi as one of the five best cricketers to have not been selected as a Wisden Cricketer of the Year.

Bedi was appointed captain of India in 1976. As always with Bedi, controversy was not far behind. Following India's record-breaking run-chase in the 3rd Test of the 1976 series against the West Indies, the West Indies opted for an aggressive four-man fast bowler attack for the 4th Test. Bedi objected to their tactics, which he regarded as intimidatory, and declared the Indian first innings closed early after two players were forced to retire hurt. Subsequently, five players were absent hurt in the second innings of the match. In November 1978, he became the first captain to concede an international cricket match. In a One Day International against Pakistan at Sahiwal, India, with 8 wickets in hand, only required 23 runs from 14 balls. Bedi, however, recalled the batsmen from the crease and conceded the match in protest at the bowling of Sarfraz Nawaz who had bowled 4 bouncers in succession with not one being called wide by the umpires. He ended his career with a record of 266 Test wickets @ 28.71.

Alec Bedser - Along with being a fine cricketer, Bedser was the chairman of selectors for the English national cricket team, and the president of Surrey County Cricket Club. He is widely regarded as one of the best English cricketers of the 20th century.

He was an outstanding right-arm medium-fast bowler for Surrey and England in a first-class playing career that spanned twenty-one years. He took 1924 first-class wickets in 485 matches. In 51 Test matches for England he took 236 wickets @ 24.89.

In his first full season for Surrey, in 1946, he passed 100 wickets before July and established himself in the England Test team. In each of his first two Tests, against the visiting Indians, he took eleven wickets: 11 for 139 in his debut at Lord's and 11 for 96 in the next game at Manchester. His amazing season resulted in his nomination as a Wisden Cricketer of the Year for 1947. He was selected for the 1946-47 Ashes series in Australia and for most of the next decade "carried England's bowling attack".

In Australia he was overbowled and exhausted and found that his natural in-swingers were liked by Australian leg-side batsmen like Sid Barnes. To counter this he gripped the ball across the seam like a spinner and the result was an in-swinging leg-break which would be known as Bedser's "Special Ball". Don Bradman wrote "the ball with which Alec Bedser bowled me in the Adelaide Test Match was, I think, the finest ever to take my wicket. It must have come three-quarters of the way straight on my off-stump, then suddenly dipped in to pitch on the leg stump, only to turn off the pitch and hit the middle and off stumps."

In the 1950-51 Ashes series he began his dominance of Australian batsmen, taking 30 wickets (16.06) and 10/105 in the Fifth Test when he ended Australians unbeaten run of 26 Tests since 1938. In 1953 at 35, an age by which many fast bowlers have retired from first-class cricket, Bedser demonstrated his longevity by helping England regain the Ashes. He took 39 wickets at an average of 17.48 at home to Australia, including career-best match figures of 14 for 99 in the Nottingham Test. In the first Test of the 1954–5 tour of Australia he was usffering from shingles and took 1/131 as seven catches were dropped off his bowling, including Arthur Morris (153) before he had scored - and England lost by an innings.

His entire first-class career spanned 485 matches, in which he helped Surrey to eight County Championships between 1950 and 1958, and took 100 wickets in a county season eleven times, figures that place him high amongst the game's greats. He took five or more wickets in an innings 96 times, and ten wickets or more in a match 16 times.

Geoffrey Boycott - former Yorkshire and England cricketer. In a prolific and sometimes controversial playing career from 1962 to 1986, Boycott established himself as one of England's most successful opening batsmen. Since retiring as a player, Boycott has found further success as a cricket commentator.

Boycott made his international debut in a 1964 Test match against Australia. He was noted for his ability to occupy the crease and became a key feature of England's Test batting line up for many years, although he was less successful in his limited One Day International appearances. He accumulated large scores – he is the fourth highest accumulator of first class centuries in history, and the first English player to average over 100.00 in a season – but often encountered friction with his team mates over his apparent selfish nature when at the crease.

After 108 Test match appearances for England, Boycott ended his international career in 1982 as the leading Test run scorer with over 8,000 Test match runs at an average of 47.72 , earning an OBE for services to cricket.

After his playing career ended, Boycott became an often outspoken and controversial cricket commentator on both radio and television.

Greg Chappell - captained Australia between 1975 and 1977 and then joined the breakaway World Series Cricket (WSC) organisation, before returning to the Australian captaincy in 1979, a position he held until his retirement 1983. The second of three brothers to play Test cricket, Chappell was the pre-eminent Australian batsman of his time who allied elegant stroke making to fierce concentration. An exceptional all round player who bowled medium pace and, at his retirement, held the world record for the most catches in Test cricket, Chappell's career straddled two eras as the game moved toward a greater level of professionalism after the WSC schism.

Since his retirement as a player in 1984, Chappell has maintained connections to professional cricket; he has been a selector for national and Queensland teams, a member of the Australian Cricket Board, and a coach. He was appointed coach of the India national cricket team on a 2 year contract in 2005. However, a series of controversies and personality clashes, combined with India's poor performance at the 2007 Cricket World Cup led to his resignation from the position on 4 April 2007. Chappell has served as an academy coach for the Rajasthan Royals, and was hired as the All Stars Coach for the 2008 Twenty20 match against Australia. He also serves as the executive coach for a series of Cricket Summer Camps in the United States as part of Chappell Way.

Chappell finished his career with 7110 Test runs at an average of 53.86, including 24 centuries, along with 47 wickets @ 40.70.

Ken Barrington is an interesting one. Given that his County Championship is acceptable but far from outstanding, it really is remarkable when you look at his statistics at the highest level. Regardless of era, a Test average of a shade below 60 is a tremendous effort, and takes incredible skill and mental strength. Ken clearly had the aptitude to go on and make the huge scores - a hallmark of a real world class batsman - and obviously thrived on facing a more difficult level of opposition, highlighted by his outstanding average against the toughest opposition of the day - Australia. Given that his career was curtailed prematurely, and Ken could have gone on to enhance those statistics further, it seems pretty clear to me that we are looking at one of the all-time great batsmen of the game. For me, Barrington is a YES.

Bishan Singh Bedi - Bedi was clearly a quite remarkable character and a very good bowler, to boot. For me though, his bowling average of a shade over 28 is fairly unremarkable for someone that we are considering for an elitist Hall of Fame, and that coupled with his numerous controversies (of which I believe he was wrong to remove his players for intimidatory tactics against them when on the verge of winning - this shows incredible weakness) sees him miss out on a spot in the 606v2 Hall. NO.

Alec Bedser - given the amount of times Bedser played against a dominant Australian side, boasting the likes of the legendary Don Bradman, I find it hard not to marvel at his statistics. He is marked down for that tour where Barnes in particular took a liking to his brand of bowling, though over-use does extenuate him slightly (we've seen it with plenty of other bowlers'. However, what clinches his spot in this Hall of Fame for me is his ability to adapt, coupled with longevity. It is the sign of a true great to be able to change their previously successful bowling style in order to adapt to the needs of a certain series or the style of a certain batsman, and Bedser did that with aplomb. Taking 100 wickets in a county season 11 times is also an incredible feat further highlighting just how good Bedser was. This one is easy, a definite YES.

Geoffrey Boycott - Boycs displayed many qualities that were revered above all others in Test match cricket at the time. A fierce reluctance to give up his wicket and the will to grind out the 'hard' runs. Boycott has to be one of the finest accumulators cricket has ever seen. However, one sign of a great is to win matches for your team. Whilst Boycott did this on occasion, and helped England out of many a sticky situation, there were also more than a few times where his reluctance to risk giving up his wicket may have cost his side victories. You only need to look back to the famous Botham run-out of Boycott to see what his team mates thought of this selfish style. A tremendous batsman, and has served the game well as a commentator, but for me Boycott falls short of the highest quality batsmen and as such is a firm NO.

Greg Chappell - Despite predominantly being a great batsman, Chappell also offered plenty to his Australian side through his bowling and exemplary catching. Longevity, skill and elegance are all words associated with Chappell's cricketing career, and when you add to this his stint as captain and his various schemes since his retirement that have helped give something back to the game, Chappell walks into this Hall of Fame and is a definite YES.

I will nominate Garner in place of Bedser, as it will be bowler for bowler.

'Big bird' was perhaps the best ODI bowler ever and with a bowling average of 18.84 and an economy of just over 3, it's easy to see why.

He was also a great test match bowler. He averaged 20.97 with the ball and had a s/rate of 50.8.

These overall figure compare with any in the modern era.

Garner also possessed a great yorker, which helped label him as one of if not the best death ball bowler in ODI Cricket.

You can't do that stella, we are going through the current ICC HoF in alphabetical order now, to decide which we are having in ours. Garners turn will come, but this first vote is on the 5 names I have listed.

Fists of Fury wrote:You can't do that stella, we are going through the current ICC HoF in alphabetical order now, to decide which we are having in ours. Garners turn will come, but this first vote is on the 5 names I have listed.

Oops, sorry fists.

Haha, no worries, mate.

We just need to go through the 5 names that are nominated ever 2 weeks, and give reasons as to why they should or shouldn't be included. As I've done above.

Well, I don't know much about the mentioned five.

G Chappell is a no for me. Great player but his captaincy wasn't the best from what I hear and he did ask brother Trevor to bowl that ball.

Again, these players were all before my time, so I will leave it to you and the other oldies to debate

shouldnt Garner be there in place of Lloyd in the original list?Lloyd wasnt an all time great batsman but Garner was an all time great bowler.

Shanks
That list is done but Lloyd is the most successful captain in test history and captained the West Indies to two world cup wins.

Hi Fists and all,

Just briefly looking in. Thanks for taking things forward.

I vote NO to Greg Chappell in the strongest possible terms. His instructions as captain to his younger brother Trevor to bowl the final ball of an ODI underarm when New Zealand needed 6 to win was totally against the spirit of the game which this Hall of Fame should be doing everything to uphold.

I'll consider the others later. I'm sure the Corporal will be planning a ruthless military campaign upon behalf of his boyhood hero Ken Barrington ....

Stella wrote:Well, I don't know much about the mentioned five.

G Chappell is a no for me. Great player but his captaincy wasn't the best from what I hear and he did ask brother Trevor to bowl that ball.

Again, these players were all before my time, so I will leave it to you and the other oldies to debate

That's the idea of something like this Stella. Those that you don't know about it gives you an opportunity to read up on them, learn about them and their achievements, and then form your own opinion on them. I find it very interesting and adds some great knowledge to that brain of mine.

Guildford/Stella - you make an interesting point with regard to that ball. Some could argue it was very astute, given that it was within the laws but not necessarily the spirit of the game, whereas on the other hand it was obviously very poor form, and is something that I hadn't initially considered when saying yes to Chappell. I might have to have a re-think...

Stella wrote:Shanks
That list is done but Lloyd is the most successful captain in test history and captained the West Indies to two world cup wins.

And Garner was a big part of that success.The thing is Garner was an All Time Great while Lloyd wasnt.Lloyd is in there for his captaincy but how can you ignore that Garner was one of the reasons why he was a successful captain?

Shanky, we've moved on mate. The inaugural 30 has been set in stone, and now it's time to vote yes or no for the 5 players above.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:

Stella wrote:Shanks
That list is done but Lloyd is the most successful captain in test history and captained the West Indies to two world cup wins.

And Garner was a big part of that success.The thing is Garner was an All Time Great while Lloyd wasnt.LLoyd is in there for his captaincy but how can you ignore that Garner was one of the reasons why he was a successful captain.

I'm not ignoring it.
But I can see why Lloyd is there. People will say that he had the players but he didn't at the start and there's still no guarantee that this brings success.
TBH, I would be happy with either of them.

Fists of Fury wrote:Shanky, we've moved on mate. The inaugural 30 has been set in stone, and now it's time to vote yes or no for the 5 players above.

Will come up with my reasons tomorrow.

Just want to know the reasons why you have Lloyd over Garner.

If the current top 30 is set in stone then it is fine.But just want to know the reasons

I've given mine.

From those nominated I'd have to agree with Fists

Barrington was one of the greatest middle-order batsmen of all-time, as his average attests. He was also however a player who performed best when the pressure was on and would give his life for the cause (as, sadly, probably proved to be the case). He may not have been the flashiest of players (though that was through his own choice), but he was the type of player every team would love to have.
Definite YES

Chappell stands, IMO, second only to the Don in terms of Australian batsmanship. A silky run getter who took on the best bowling and suceeded more often than not (see his performances in WSC as an example), he was also a decent part-time bowler and great slip catcher.
His instruction to his brother was, admittedly, totally against the spirit of the game but, for me, it was an abberation that should not detract from his overall greatness as a player.
Definite YES

Bedser is, probably, the greatest medium-paced seam bowler in cricket history (if you count Barnes as a spinner). Carried the England bowling from the end of WWII to the mid 1950s and discovered a chink in the Don's previously impenetrable armour. Bowled more overs in a county season than most England bowlers do in 10 years these days (only joking. Just)
Definite YES

You ave only stated why Lloyd is there.What I want to know is why should be there ahead of Garner

Nice one Hoggy, can we give reasons as to why we aren't nominating those we say NO to as well please fellas. Ta.

I totally agree with your votes Fists. Will give my reasons later when I have more time.
Have to study now.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:You ave only stated why Lloyd is there.What I want to know is why should be there ahead of Garner

I don't really care. As I said, either is fine with me.

Fists of Fury wrote:Nice one Hoggy, can we give reasons as to why we aren't nominating those we say NO to as well please fellas. Ta.

Pretty similar to your reasoning Fists.
Bedi was a good bowler, but a great, no, probably not. There are any number of spinners who would rank ahead of him IMO, including two or three from India.
Boycott is a tricky one. He DID play good innings against good bowlers, but his innate selfishness, his failure to take on Lillee and Thompson at their peak and the fact that there are at least 5 or 6 openers who would rank ahead of him in all-time terms all count against his inclusion for me.