Healy and Warne......Gilchrist and Warne???? 😂

@@vantheman12welshman66 OK I will give you that, perhaps I should have said best ever English Spin, keeper combo! Maybe Warne Gilchrist best ever, especially when you add Gilchrists poetry with the bat! Underwood and Knott not far behind in second place for me!

@@vantheman12welshman66 You know what I have had second thoughts after going through many old matches that included both combinations and am going back to underwood/ Knott. here is why, Warne was defo the best spinner, perhaps the best of all time but it is commonly held view that Knott was the best wicketkeeper ever! I gave it to the English pair because when thinking about this combination Underwood/Knott also played for Kent together as well as for England and their understanding developed over years. So I go back to my original decision although it was a very hard choice

@@stevebrindle1724 They appeared to have a telepathic understanding of each other and Knott in my opinion is the greatest

bedi and anyone

If only you could spell his name right.

@@golden.lights.twinkle2329 sorry speed of fingers.

At his peak from 1968 to 1972 John Snow was the finest fast bowler in the world. Won two big series and was the leading wicket in both winning series away from home against the West Indies in 1968 and then Australia in 1970/1. To do that puts Snow at the top table of England fast bowlers.

John Snow - legend - the #1 England fast bowler since '60s. Better than Trueman ? Probably

I prefered Andrew Flintoff to Botham although I must admit my view of Botham is skewed a bit because he is a Thatcherite Tory bastard and that puts me right of him! Andrew Flintoff is also from my hometown Preston and that makes me like him more. Not good cricket reasons I know but I am only human!

@@stevebrindle1724 better cricketer than Flintoff but an utter wanker

Ian Botham was my cricket hero when I was growing up. An amazing player, especially for the first half of his career. The fact that he got wickets later on in his career was testament to how accurate a bowler he was as well.

After 1987 Ian Botham was plagued with injuries and concentrated a lot on charity work which detracted from his playing performances. At his best he was the greatest all-rounder ever. Time and time again he created brilliant era defining performances winning matches from seemingly untenable positions. Looking at his statistics from 1976 to 1987 they are incredible .

Botham in his peak was a match winner with bat and ball. Great fielder too. First half of his career he was a legend. And great mates with legends Richards and Garner. Great days

No , there's 2 or 3 English batsmen over 60 , from memory .Still a great , tho'.

With a stick of rhubarb in the corridor of uncertainty!

Win at all costs? When Boycott batted, winning was a very distant second behind him personally batting as long as he could.

To bloody right.

@@Bernie8330 your inexperience tells me you played very little cricket, and opened the batting even less. going in up top requires selfishness, and dogged resistance. perhaps you preferred us to be 30 for 4 in very quick time.

That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. Even funnier because it's so true.

You had me going there. Do they? Clang

😂😂😂

100-0 or your preference 45-4

Tinker!

fred and boycott were bitter enamies

@@davec8730 thx, m8, I am very sorry to hear this, especially since they both played for Yorkshire together and even played a couple of test matches for England. Yes, it's true, great men are often not easy to handle

Flintoff?

He picked players he played with NOT all time England team

Jim Laker has to be there in 11.

Barrington instead of Pietersen? Is your aim to bore spectators to death? Why the obligation to pick Grace? And picking Larwood on account of the 1932-33 series is like picking Mitchell Johnson in an all-time Australian team based solely on 2013-14 series.

100 percent. Ames as reserve wicket keeper. I've always gone with Hutton, Sutcliffe, hobbs, Hammond, Compton. But can't argue with argue with above.

Were you? 🤔

Trueman, like Anderson, was only great in England, and in England Anderson was just as great.

Jimmy is a legend and his longevity and wicket haul is amazing but he's never been regarded as an absolute all-time superstar on the same level as, say, an Ambrose, Marshall, Donald, McGrath, Wasim, Waqar etc but Freddie Trueman was regarded as the best fast bowler in the world for nearly all of his career. You say Trueman wasn't great away from home and wasn't better than Anderson at home but let's look at the figures. Trueman's Test career average - 21.57. Home - 20.04. Away - 26.08. Anderson's Test career average - 26.58. Home - 24.20. Away - 31.62. Trueman didn't play against minnows like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh, so let's compare their records against countries they both played against: Averages v Australia - Trueman 25.30, Anderson 33.76. v India - Trueman 14.84, Anderson 25.22. v New Zealand - Trueman 19.05, Anderson 28.82. v Pakistan - Trueman 19.95, Anderson 19.31. v South Africa - Trueman 22.96, Anderson 31.52. v West Indies - Trueman 23.46, Anderson 22.60. Going back to their career averages, now there may not seem to be that much difference between a bowler with an average in the very early 20s and one with an average in the mid-late 20s but if you look at a list of the all-time leading wicket takers, you can certainly see that an average of around 21,22 shows you're one of the all-time great superstars whilst an average of about 26,27 shows you were a brilliant bowler but not an all-time great. For example, those with an average in the early 20s are bowlers like McGrath, Ambrose and Marshall and those with an average in the mid-late 20s and bowlers like Ntini, Mitchell Johnson and Morne Morkel. All of the above were great bowlers but cricket fans who know their stuff will get a sense that the first group were better than the second group and I think it's clear that Trueman belongs in the first group and Anderson belongs in the second one.

@@Ernest_Thesiger I am not interested in averages, but rather match winning performances. Anyone that claims there has been a better bowler in English conditions than Anderson is not to be taken seriously. I don't believe Anderson has actually played too many tests against either Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, and in Truman's time India and Pakistan were the equivalent of those two minnows in any case. The fact that Truman took 75% of his wickets in England says quite a bit about which conditions he was best suited for.

45:20 hmmm

@@johnnyhammer Well he would say that! Listen to what he says about Fred after he'd become friends with him again years later in the video "My XI - Geoffrey Boycott: Fred Trueman". Geoff is asked to name the best 11 bowlers in the history of world cricket and he puts Fred at number 3!

I was thinking about the coaching team.... Boycott and erm Boycott..... and the umpires?.... Boycott, Boycott and Boycott. Not to mention the commentary team of Boiycott and Boycott, cameras by Boycott and scoring by Boycott. What have I missed? Oh, teas by Boycott!

You forgot thev12th man......

@@ds1868 Oh yes.... shall we guess... does his surname begin with a 'B' by any chance?

Saucey😂😂😂😂

Massies Match at Lords 1972. If Arnold had played he would have swung it around as well. Ideal conditions.

@@rugbydad678 well said. Couldn’t agree more. English selectors 🤦‍♂️

he did, by you, he wasn't good enough, lillee and thommo had him on toast.

50 years ago more like..I wouldn't pick any of them maybe the Test squad like Ali Cook, James Anderson and Kevin Pietersen

@@jahno7154 you wouldn’t pick any of these players in a current England team? If that is what you’re saying then you do not have any idea about the game. Learn about cricket, your history and study these cricketers. Because that team Boycott picked includes ten world class cricketers and one world class captain. Illingworth won the ashes in Australia. He won the John Player League title for Yorkshire when they were not a great side after returning to captain the side in his late forties. I mean have you ever heard of Ted Dexter? You wouldn’t pick Ian Botham!!!!!!! Educate yourself and do some reading on these players.

andy the players in 2020 are not in the same class as geoffs elevan..

@@jahno7154 Knott is the best keeper of all time and he could bat, 30 half centuries and around have a dozen tons for England in around 90 tests.

@@markhiggins8315 I Know he was the best I never said he wasn't. The best keeper I've ever seen was Jack Russell Alan Knott was in his 40s when i started watching cricket but some of the old footage of Alan Knott he looked outstanding. I said none of todays cricketers wouldn't get into Boycotts eleven not the other way round

He played with Trueman

Nothing better than marmite LOL !

It wouldn't matter who you put against them for a few years. They were simply unbelievable and unbeatable. By the way, I am Australian. They were simply the best, the like of we won't witness again. Not as a quartet anyway. 😁🤣👍🍺😊

@@dennispicone6801 yes. Entirely so.

@@dennispicone6801 Yes, they were a very talented side, but they got away with some slow over rates then and the protection available to batsmen was not as good. England badly missed Snow on the 74-75 Ashes series. the selectors wouldn't pick him because he bowled underarm in a trial match.

@@112sje lawn bowls I hope. It's the best surface. 👍🤣🤣

Ken Barrington instead of Kevin Pietersen? Really?? Also, Root is very overrated, he is very good at filling his boots and bloating his average in soft, low intensity situations. You won't get 20 wickets any game outside of England with Trueman and Anderson in your attack. They'll be dynamite together at home in England though.

@@Bernie8330 opinion changed in 7 months. My first choice spinner is now Hedley Verity. In spin conditions, Jim Laker in place of Ben Stokes Will try to post whole squad for any situation.

As, of 13 May 2022 - 1. Jack Hobbs 2. Len Hutton (c) 3. Ken Barrington 4. Wally Hammond 5. Joe Root 6. Kevin Pietersen 7. Alan Knott (wk) 8. Ben Stokes 9. Ian Botham 10. Sydney Barnes 11. Fred Trueman 12. James Anderson 13. Hedley Verity 14. Jim Laker

​@@rorschach2992was

​@@rorschach2992mu

Athhar3 Isn't he selecting from teams that he played in?😙 Surprisingly he didn't make himself captain...

Never any doubt he'd pick himself!

@@a95569 he was in on merit, during boycott's career england had no finer opening bat. with boycott playing england could be 100-0, maybe your selections would have had us 26-3, but done it in a flourish.

Oh , yeah , no Sutcliffe .Hobbs , Verity , etc etc etc

9 hundreds in 43 Ashes tests is pretty good.

@@Bernie8330 18 hundreds in 117 tests was a pretty average return for someone of his ability. For comparison, Joe Root currently has 30 from 130 tests. I’d actually say Gower was the more talented batsman, but lacked Root’s concentration.

@@johnt7630 cannot argue on that.

NO!

Paul Linford He has chosen twelve players...that was the custom in those days...😙

Well, England is always looking for a draw in team selection.

Illingworth over-rated as a batsman. Both Fred Titmus and David Allen had better batting records. Boycott couldn't get in a best Yorkshire team with Sutcliffe and Hutton ahead of him

Loooooool!!

Pretty good team TBH

Any West Indian team between 1966 and 1982 I would think. All the W. Indies teams I have seen, and that Geoff played against, were extremely talented !

the one's he played against.

i'd guess he'd figure cowdrey a better captain, and brearley may have been the best but couldn't make the XI, but i'm basing my assessment on knowledge of cricket, whilst yours is based on critical bias.

Agree 100%

Agree! He's always said he's the best fast bowler he's ever played with. Added to that he scored 3 first class centuries (on uncovered pitches too).

Well they did hate each other for years especially Fred

Not certain but I don't think he played with him for England.

@@stepheng8779 He did 1964 Ashes Test Series.

what were hobbs and sutcliffe's TEST averages at the end of their careers? anyway the side was picked from players in boycotts era.

hahahaha! an aussie calling someone else a 'narcissist', boycott picked himself on merit.

David Petherbridge David, I’m sure he would if it was a modern day choice. This video was made in the 90’s though, hence no Jimmy.

rugbydad678 sorry didn’t read the whole story!!

This is who he played for England with

they hated each other, it's a yorkshire thing, and 'now't to do wi theee'

If it came down Flintoff toss it again and keep going until you got the right result 😂

His parameters were that they were all contemporaries of his at one time or another. Only real surprise to me is Arnold ahead of Trueman. However, it's well documented that there was never love lost between them.

hahahaha! flinthoff was decent, BUT botham was some considerable distance better.

@@davec8730 you’re right, however you have to look at Botham’s stats in the first 6 years to realize what a great all-rounder he was. Afterwards, due to injuries, he seriously declined.

Where is Andy Flintoff? He is better than tory twat Botham!

Where is Derek underwood

Steve Brindle oh good we have a left wing labour voter

@@georgecurtis5371 No I am far to the left of labour! I am the silly mid- on of politics

@@georgecurtis5371 What's wrong with that ?

A few things really. He lost his form against India and a left arm medium pacer called Solkar who got him out five times. Then there was the Yorkshire captaincy from 1971 to 1978 where he had little success in terms of winning matches, however, his form was good except for the start of the 1975 season. Then there was the England captaincy, which Boycott felt should be his, however, the job went to Mike Denness of Kent who Boycott didn’t rate as a player or particularly like as a man, so Boycott refused to play under the captaincy of Mike Denness. Boycott went into self imposed international cricket exile from 1974 to the Trent Bridge Test of 1977 where on his return he ran out the local hero Derek Randall, and then went on to score a century in his comeback test against Australia. All in all it was down to Boycott being totally self absorbed in himself and not seeing the bigger picture. In terms of his England career he cut off his nose to spite his face, and has openly said since that he deeply regrets missing those years and a total of around 30 test matches. A great England opening batsman who because of his personality scored huge amounts of runs at sometimes to the detriment of others and perhaps himself.

@@vantheman1238 Boycott also delayed his comeback by a year in order to avoid facing Holding and Roberts in 1976 when Grieg was already captain. 1977 was perfectly timed for his comeback without Dennis Lillee in the opposition, and Thommo less effective in England than in Australia. He was not a great batsman at all. He has a horrendously high percentage of not outs for an opener, and he relied on a very slow scoring rate in order to facilitate all those not outs that bloated his average. And a lot of his runs would have been made on flat pitches in high scoring draws, particularly in 3rd and 4th innings when matches were already long since going nowhere and well and truly fizzling out.

@@Bernie8330 Boycott played test cricket against Lillee, Thomson, Roberts, Holding, Marshall, Croft, Garner, Imran Khan, Hadlee, not to mention earlier encounters with P Pollock, Hall & Griffith......He may be self-absorbed and egotistical, but if he was trying to avoid fast bowling, he obviously failed

@@sirbuftontufton5846 Thanks for the comment and congratulations on your knighthood. This is a run down of Boycott's 22 test tons: 1. v Australia The Oval 1964 Hard to analyse. It was a draw, but not a high scoring one, but also not a tense affair either, and there was obviously maybe up to two sessions lost to weather in the game? In any case, very slow scoring by Boycott. When faced with a large deficit in third innings of match, best defence is quick scoring to wipe it off and get quickly back in front. Even if you can’t win, you can avoid defeat quicker. Kevin Pietersen at the Oval in 2005 is a great example of this principle. 2. v South Africa Gqeberha 1965 High scoring draw where conditions are in batsmen’s favour. Another moronically slow scoring rate by Boycott, even for the era. Doesn’t appear to have ever been too much chance of a result at any stage. 3. v India Leeds 1967 Much improved strike rate of 44, but in a runaway victory against a minnow attack. Only six England players batted in first innings and there were two centuries amongst them and another two halfs. Although India imploded in their first innings reply, lots of runs when they followed on, so this indicates run scoring was easy in the match. Boycott’s 246 can be capped as low as 100 and at 150 at the highest, given that England lost so few wickets in their first innings. 4. v West Indies Georgetown 1968 This appears like a good innings in the context of the tense finish to the match. However, the attack faced was not great. I’m not sure how good Hall still was in 1968, but there is no Griffith, and Sobers is opening the bowling, whose career strike rate was only a wicket every 91 balls. It does appear like Sobers bowled well in that innings, his three wickets being among the top 5 batsmen, but the third of those only left England 4 for 194 - neither a dominant nor a precarious score. 5. v West Indies Manchester 1969 This century contributed to a win, but no Hall in attack or Griffith and once again Sobers opening the bowling. Not one of the great attacks in history. Another slow scoring rate by Boycott and hardly a lone hand. 6. v West Indies Lords 1969 No Hall again, and a mediocre attack with Sobers, a handy 5th bowler by most standards, the spearhead. A real possibility of a win for England, needed to score at a collective strike rate of 49 runs per 100 balls faced off the bat, excluding extras, and Boycott manages a strike rate of only 38. 7. v Australia Sydney 1970-71 This is a soft low intensity situation where he opened at a real score of 0 for +96 and it was against a weak attack. Dennis Lillee had not yet debuted, and Graham MacKenzie was over the hill. 8. v Australia Adelaide 1970-71 This is less than low intensity but rather absolute zero pressure, starting his innings at 0 for +235. MacKenzie is gone for good by now, and Lillee is only a raw rookie in his very first series. Batting first in the match, on a flat track, Boycott had laboured for 58 off 161 deliveries. At this stage of his career, the guy doesn’t exactly seem like a dominant impact player. 9. v Pakistan Lords 1971 Obviously a rain ruined draw if the side batting first is declaring at a mammoth 2 for 241, but at least Boycs has upped his strike rate to a phenomenal 46 runs per 100 balls faced. I believe Imran Khan may have debuted this series, but he was an 18 year old rookie and Pakistan were still minnows. Imran didn’t start realising his potential until the mid-70s and his peak was during the 80s. In any case he didn’t play in this match, nor century number 10 to follow. 10. v Pakistan Headingly 1971 A century in a very close match where all 40 wickets fell with no other centuries on either side and only 8 50+ scores in total across both sides for whole match. Well done Sir Geoffrey. Heck, first time in 10 attempts, he has scored a test ton above a par strike rate of 50. 11. v New Zealand Headingly 1973 Far out, a strike rate of 63!!! Minnow attack though, and certainly no Headley for a good few years yet … 12. v West Indies Port of Spain 1974 I almost fell asleep reading the scorecard: 99 off 340 balls and then to repeat the dose, 112 off 385. Good win to England against a very weak attack. Certainly no Holding, Roberts, Garner, Croft or Marshall just yet … Intermission: This was the point where he did not face Lillee and Thomson out here in 1974-75, or Holding and Roberts at home in England in 1976. Then came his comeback in 1977 when Lillee didn’t play, and Thomson was not only not suited to English conditions, but was also recovering from a severe shoulder injury caused by a dreadful collision the previous summer out here. 13. v Australia Trent Bridge 1977 Credit where it’s due: Even if Thommo was neither fully fit, nor in his element, Pascoe was an exception bowler, and Max Walker was a swing bowler and this test was in England. However, 107 off 315 balls … 14. v Australia Headingly 1977 A good innings but don’t be fooled by Australia’s bowling figures: 3 of Pascoe’s 4 wickets were the last three wickets to fall when the total was already past 400, which Australia were never going to get near, so Pascoe exerted no impact. The last of Thomson’s wickets left England at 5 for 275 which was pretty much also good night for Australia by that point. A good innings, but in a run away victory. I would cap the 191 at 100 for true impact on his team’s fortunes, but again, an excruciatingly slow strike rate of 40. 15. v Pakistan Hyderabad 1978 No impact here whatsoever, this was a rain ruined draw with more than 3 of the first 4 days play lost. The target was out of reach and England had less than a day to survive - finishing 1 for 186 with Brearley well past 50 does not exactly indicate tough batting conditions. Another slow scoring effort from Boycott. Imran Khan was also not playing nor was Sarfraz Nawaz. 16. v New Zealand 1978 A massive innings victory with Boycott scoring at 35 runs per 100 balls faced. Hadlee played but New Zealand had no even remotely world class batsman, so hardly a critical performance from Boycs. He gets a duck and England still win comfortably, and yet this was one of only two wins for England in the 8 tests he scored a ton post the 1977 Ashes comeback series. 17. v India Edgbaston 1979 155 scored at a below par strike rate of 45 (actually fast scoring for him) in a runaway victory against a minnow in a mammoth team total of 5 for 633. Boycott makes a duck here, and England still win comfortably. 18. v India The Oval 1979 This is an interesting one: India finish 9 runs from a successful run chase that would be a world record to this very day. England declared 8 wickets down in 3rd innings of match with Boycott scoring a ton at yet another slow strike rate of 42. 19. v Australia Lords 1980 Faced Lillee for the first time since 1971) in rain ruined draw. Little if any intensity left in match situation when England started out in out of reach 4th innings target with less than day left in match but at least achieved a par strike rate of 50 this occasion. 20. v West Indies Antigua 1980 Boycott made 38 batting first. England trailed by 190 with all 10 wickets left in 3rd innings at stumps on day 3. Entire 4th day lost. With most intensity gone from the match situation, and little chance of a result, Boycott took advantage and clocked up an average bloating ton. This, and the following home English summer was the first and only times he faced those West Indian bowlers you cited, and this was the only ton he scored, and it exerted little, if any impact on the match. 21. v Australia The Oval 1981 Relatively high scoring draw and a dead rubber to boot, and I am not aware he did too much of any significance earlier in the series. 22. v India Delhi 1981-82 Very high scoring draw with only 19 wickets falling and a full days play lost and yet more tortoise speed scoring from Boycott. I have never actually analysed Boycott’s test tons before, and it has been a lot of fun. Nothing special about him as a test player. He might have dominated at county level for all I know, but in test cricket he had a massively bloated average. He also had a horrendously high percentage of not outs for an opener which he relied upon to facilitate that bloated average. He subsequently relied upon super slow mo scoring speed to facilitate those not outs to facilitate that high average.

@@Bernie8330 Bernie, so what you're saying is he was slow and selfish. I think both of those are self-evident. But the accusation of avoiding fast bowling doesn't stack up. He quit the international game around May 1974 after a string of failures against an Indian medium pacer called Solkar. Most people agree that he was aggrieved at Denness being captain (Boycott was an awful skipper), angry at events at Yorkshire, and unable to cope with loss of form. There just weren't any fast bowlers around at the time. As I posted elsewhere, when he refused to tour Australia, Dennis Lillee had been out of the game for a year with a back injury, and people suspected his career was over, and no-one had heard of Jeff Thomson. People expected the Aussie openers to be Geoff Dymock and Max Walker - OK bowlers but hardly fast. After that his exile was just pure stubbornness. Great post by the way - enjoyed it.

he was in on merit.

I think the idea of the video is that the choice was limited to players who Boycott had played with, not the greatest of all time.

He can’t have played with SF Barnes, surely? Or maybe he did - SFB strikes me as the kind of guy to have been playing club cricket in his eighties.

I grew up watching Edrich, great bat

@@dutchy777 how old are you? i remember edrich but at the end of his england career and suffering badly from short pitched fast bowling.

read and UNDERSTAND the headline.

Yeah, I was surprised but its clear he was only going to pick players that he personally played with. The one player who I was amazed he left out was Fred Trueman, as he did play with Fred at the start of his test career. If I was picking the best ever Pom team, I'd more likely pick the guys you mentioned though Barrington would be an automatic pick in any. I also think Ray Illingworth should not be picked as his test results were more related to captaincy. His test batting average was only 23.2 which is hardly an allrounder, more a useful lower order player. As a bowler only took 122 wickets in 61 tests - okay average at 31.2 but was only a part time bowler.

@@markdignam3525 Agree. In terms of how his selection was described, I found it highly flawed, just like his captaincy!

Lindwall was AUSTRALIAN

@@Baskerville22 Ooops lol

@@Baskerville22 My greatest England XI: Ponsford, Hayden, Bradman, Ponting, G Chappell, Miller, Gilchrist, Davidson, Warne, Lillee, McGrath

@@Baskerville22 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! PRICELESS, what a muppet eh? some will post just anything.

nah! ur being bitter.

He was picking a team from players he had played with.😊

back in the 50's?

Root or Anderson as the 12th man ?

Cook Root Swann Anderson weren't around in the 90s when this was made

@@anweshchatterjee7595 i know its just mine.

Root again? LOL

got it ALL WRONG AGAIN.

I think you might have nailed it.

I continue to shake my head in amusement at the number of people who pick Root.

@@Bernie8330 personal choice. Yes Hammond Dexter Thorpe etc but Root stands up against them all and will surpass in runs terms in the end no doubt. Look at the highlights of old times on YTube and all batters ( modern ) have poorer periods

@@ianwright7133 Root is not somebody who makes the tough runs when it matters. He is over rated.

@@Bernie8330 That is clearly wrong he has carried the English he has carried the England cricket team this last year the best at that the best at that was of course Peter May

Doesn't add up. Boycott quit England in summer 1974 after repeat failures against Solkar, a medium pacer. When he refused selection for the Aussie tour, Dennis Lillee's career was thought to be over due to injury, and no-one had ever heard of Jeff Thomson. At the time of his non-selection, England expected to face an opening pair of Geoff Dymock and Max Walker. Are you suggesting Boycott didn't have the stomach to face those two?

@@sirbuftontufton5846 Sir Colin Cowdrey (wonderful man) came and faced the music in Perth after not playing for a long time so if he had of really wanted to he (Boycott) could have mended the broken bridges with English management but chose not to.

@@steventhomson8387 Agree about Cowdrey. Boycott though was complex, and was screwed up concerning many things, including Yorkshire CC and Mike Denness. But the idea that he "bottled" the Aussie tour because he wanted to avoid fast bowling is (though widespread) easily debunked by looking at the cast of fast bowlers he faced both before and after that tour.

@@sirbuftontufton5846 final observation: as Tony Greig stated "if Boycott and Snow had of been on that tour it would have made a huge difference". Personally I don't think it would have mattered and Oz would have romped home as there was so much momentum for the home side. Anyway all the best and nice talking to you. Those were the great days of cricket.

@@steventhomson8387 Cheers Steven. Totally agree. Boycott, brave or not, wouldn't have swung that series, nor Snow. I recall reading Swanton writing about Snow back then, and saying that the chairman of selectors (Bedser) was a strict disciplinarian. He wrote "when Bedser was appointed, Snow's chances of selection flew out of the window".

All time classic from Geoffrey, that! :)

He was the best opening bat in the era he played in for England so I think although it might look( and indeed could be)rather arrogant it's a fair call.

Finally somebody with enough sense to pick Pietersen instead of Barrington.

@@Bernie8330 what year did boycott pay with pietersen?

falshood made up by derbyshire supporters, you'll be telling us next miller could bat.

Boycott has a horrendously high percentage of not outs for an opener, and he relied on a very slow scoring rate in order to facilitate those high number of not outs in order to facilitate that high average. A lot of his runs would have been made on flat pitches in high scoring draws, especially in 3rd and 4th innings when the match was in the process of fizzling out.

better tracks in aus. don't you know that?

amiss was a walking wicket, lillee and thommo had him out when he coming down the pavillion steps.

Geoff is marmite! I can only say as an Englishman and cricket lover for over 50yrs I remember a time when England's batting collapsed regularly, mostly in the 70s and the only man we could rely on to score runs was Boycott. Don't forget this was an era of great W. Indies and Aussie quicks! India and Pakistan on the other hand were regularly taken apart by Boycott

bullshit.

my dad told me tyson was as fast as holding

It's need to be correction with joe root and alaister cook

@@johnholmes912 In 1954-55 Ashes out here he very likely was. However, it appears Tyson was of the Bruce Reid, Brett Schultz and Simon Jones vintage.

how VERY silly you didn't understand they were people boycott had played with and against.

Best Petl

geoff2209 kingi ids Bob Taylor was indeed unfortunate to be around in the same era as Alan Knott. Some considered Taylor to be the best gloveman but Knotty edged selection with his batting skills.

What about Godfrey Evans?

Evans before my time

Very little between them with the gloves

Hard to be better than Knott. Never remember him making an error and, moreover, saw him pull off many dismissals that were miraculous.