Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.
-
I wonder how they'll factor in overseas work and particularly IPL. Fleming's work at CSK has been absolutely sensational, but not sure if that should be considered here. Even without it he's still going into make it in eventually, but I think it's marginal whether or not makes the first 11.
(For those incapable of following links, this 'first 11' is just the first cohort of inductees. More players will be added as time goes on, there's no restriction to only 11 members).
I wouldn't vote for Southee if it was my call, but I think he'll get in on the number of wickets.
I'd put Wags in on a combination of on field performance and the fact that no-one else can achieve the same results with his method, so he clearly has something special. I can totally see how others wouldn't vote him in though.
-
In the context of an NZ Cricket Hall of Fame, I'd imagine every name listed above will eventually make it over the years, and for good reasons. Otherwise it'd likely be the Sir Richard Hadlee Hall of Fame, with a Kane Williamson Foyer and a Martin Crowe Alcove.
-
@Donsteppa said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
In the context of an NZ Cricket Hall of Fame, I'd imagine every name listed above will eventually make it over the years, and for good reasons. Otherwise it'd likely be the Sir Richard Hadlee Hall of Fame, with a Kane Williamson Foyer and a Martin Crowe Alcove.
There might be genuine questions who is the ultimate GOAT of those two when KW retires. If I break things down I think KW takes second spot though despite an incredible record.
One hopes he goes out on top and the average doesn’t dip slightly ( like it did for Ponting, Tendulkar, Dravid etc )
KW has more tests ( so more longevity ) but it can be argued ( with admittedly some validity ) that he is a bit of a home track bully.
Paddles as well as being possibly the best pace bowler of his generation was a bit of an all rounder too and slightly embarrassingly had a better batting record than some specialist batsmen of his generation. He also had far less minnows to pad the stats against. KW is an ok spinner but never has a go these days.
KW just got 9000 runs, amazing achievement, only the 19th player ever……but Paddles was the first to 400 wickets so definitely more of a trailblazer.
KW on the whole had far better teammates.
I think it’s been asked before on here but if Crowe comfortably takes third spot who is the final member of NZs Mt Rushmore ?
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@Cyclops said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
I wonder if it's the top 11 or a playing 11. I wouldn't put Ian Smith in the top 11 black caps but he'd probably be the keeper in our best playing 11 (although I might take Watling and I imagine their will be some that want to push McCullum although I don't think his record as a keeper is good enough).
If it's a top 11
Crowe
Hadlee
Sutcliffe
Vettori
Wright
Turner
Cowie
Dempster
McCullum
Fleming
ConeyLast three get in on the back of captoincy as well as playing record. Considered but not included: JF Reid, Chris Cairns, Martin Donnelly, Shane Bond.
Not yet eligible, but would be in if they were: Kane, Southee, Taylor, Boult, Wags.
Coney is no chance. Wright possible but might be clutching a bit.
Cowie and Dempster played 19 tests between them, you can’t pick them no matter how great their numbers are !
Back in the day, though, First Class cricket was much more important and significant than now.
What they might well do is pick someone from every decade since the 40s - and then add three more.
-
@MN5 Sir Paddles was never ranked #1, never captained and was less of a team player.
Just pointing out you can make an argument for each.
So for the 11
Hadlee, Crowe, Hockley, Sutcliffe, Turner, Reid, Vettori are locks IMO
Donnelly, Cowie, Drumm very likely.
Then you roll a dice - Fleming, Collinge, Bruce Taylor.
I'd be surprised if it was Cairns I'd give Frank Cameron a better chance than him - for overall contribution to the game, but can't really see that happening.
Probably another woman Problem there is there are a number of much of a muchness candidates
-
@dogmeat said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@MN5 Sir Paddles was never ranked #1, never captained and was less of a team player.
Just pointing out you can make an argument for each.
So for the 11
Hadlee, Crowe, Hockley, Sutcliffe, Turner, Reid, Vettori are locks IMO
Donnelly, Cowie, Drumm very likely.
Then you roll a dice - Fleming, Collinge, Bruce Taylor.
I'd be surprised if it was Cairns I'd give Frank Cameron a better chance than him - for overall contribution to the game, but can't really see that happening.
Probably another woman Problem there is there are a number of much of a muchness candidates
Yes he was as both a bowler and all rounder at different stages.
Hadlee did cause a bit of a stink with that car fiasco ( taking it for himself instead of splitting it with the team ) as I recall but I don’t think that affects his rating too much.
Whatever we say Paddles and KW are far and away New Zealand’s best players ever, a fair gap to Crowe in third spot.
Cairns has superb numbers but a polarising personality and all that match fixing stuff might play a part in him not getting there.
BUT his huge health issues will generate a lot of sympathy too. I wouldn’t be surprised either way.
-
-
@Godder said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
https://www.nzc.nz/news-items/nzc-hall-of-fame-first-eleven-inducted/
‘A softer guideline was that players recognised should be of world-class stature in their prime, good enough to be picked in a theoretical World XI.’
Hmmmmm. This definitely doesn’t apply to Vettori or McCullum.
Possibly Reid, I’d have to check his record against others of his era.
Paddles would walk in of course. Crowe too given he played in such a tough era. Turner and Sutcliffe sounded like absolute class players.
As the article says, it’s there to spark a bit of debate…..
-
-
@Godder said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@MN5 Sir Paddles is still a viable selection for an all-time XI, where KW isn't currently although I suppose if he can score another 3,000 runs, he'd be getting close.
All time world XI ?
Yep, Paddles is an option.
Vettori and McCullum aren’t even certainties for an all time NZ XI if we’re being honest
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@Godder said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@MN5 Sir Paddles is still a viable selection for an all-time XI, where KW isn't currently although I suppose if he can score another 3,000 runs, he'd be getting close.
All time world XI ?
Yep, Paddles is an option.
Vettori and McCullum aren’t even certainties for an all time NZ XI if we’re being honest
Sorry, yes, all-time World XI.
Disagree about Vettori and McCullum - obviously it's possible to select a viable all-time NZ XIs for particular formats without either if selecting a particular team balance e.g. 5 batters, 5 bowlers and Watling at 6 would leave McCullum out of a test XI, and wouldn't be that hard to have 4-5 quality pacers and leave Vettori out of a test XI as well.
However, in ODIs and T20Is, they are top tier selections, so any all-format NZ XI really has to include them. Obviously the older players like Paddles didn't play T20Is, but their ODI play would give some indication of likely quality in T20Is as well.
-
T20 play shouldn't qualify.
-
@antipodean said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
T20 play shouldn't qualify.
Indeed. It’s like choosing an All Black hall of fame and basing it on how a player went at sevens
-
@MN5 said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@antipodean said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
T20 play shouldn't qualify.
Indeed. It’s like choosing an All Black hall of fame and basing it on how a player went at sevens
If world cricket went to wholly separate series for T20 along the lines of rugby 7s, with 5 or 6 a side, maybe. Cricket doesn't do that though, so it's not really a fair comparison - sure, there are format specialists, but there is still plenty of player overlap between the formats at international level, particularly between ODIs and either Tests or T20.
Perhaps the point is more that T20 specialists aren't going to get far in an all-format selection where tests are always going to be weighted as most important and ODIs second, but T20 play might have something to offer as part of a balanced process.
Also, for the players in question (McCullum and Vettori), even if their T20 records were ignored, their ODI records were still phenomenal.
-
@Godder said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@MN5 said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
@antipodean said in Black Caps First Eleven for hall of fame.:
T20 play shouldn't qualify.
Indeed. It’s like choosing an All Black hall of fame and basing it on how a player went at sevens
If world cricket went to wholly separate series for T20 along the lines of rugby 7s, with 5 or 6 a side, maybe. Cricket doesn't do that though, so it's not really a fair comparison - sure, there are format specialists, but there is still plenty of player overlap between the formats at international level, particularly between ODIs and either Tests or T20.
Perhaps the point is more that T20 specialists aren't going to get far in an all-format selection where tests are always going to be weighted as most important and ODIs second, but T20 play might have something to offer as part of a balanced process.
Also, for the players in question (McCullum and Vettori), even if their T20 records were ignored, their ODI records were still phenomenal.
Yeah I can justify ODI records being part of the criteria but even then, would Vettori and BMac ever be World XI contenders ?
…..and I say that as someone who is a massive fan of both.
BMac wouldn’t get past Gilly, Sehwag, Hayden, Gayle etc as an opener, obviously Gilly is a keeper too.
Vettori might get in as a spinner although it would be a tough ask ahead of Warne, Murali, Kumble etc although he actually took more wickets than Warnie in that format and his record is pretty close to Kumbles.
But then again, both have been massive for NZ cricket in terms of some of the intangibles so look, they probably deserve to be there.
-
@MN5 Generally agree, as did the selectors since 'could make world XI' was a softer criterion - the stats highlighted in BMac's profile are first NZ test 300, fastest test 100 and first player to play 100 consecutive tests from debut along with the team culture under his captaincy.
BMac outlasted most of those players other than Gayle (2019), so there's possibly a time after Sehwag retired in 2013 when BMac would have been in contention for the other opener spot up until his retirement in 2016 (has a slightly better record than Warner in some of their overlapping years for example). Probably some other opener I've forgotten about though.
Also a phenomenal time for legendary WK-batsmen throughout BMac's career with Gilchrist, Sangakkara and AB DeVilliers all prominent, so he would have struggled to be first pick in that department whether as an opener or middle order dasher.
-
“The first intake is always the most straight-forward as it includes some players who essentially pick themselves, they stand out that much,” said Payne.
Disagree. Didn't know about the 4 women criteria. Never heard of Jackie Lord but 55 wickets @19.07 from 15 tests. What's she doing Thursday?
I have real issues with McCullum's inclusion. Yes, he was good, but it seems like a vibe selection. He certainly doesn't pick himself IMO. Granted he has the 300, but Fleming would probably have got their earlier if he hadn't put the team ahead of personal glory. Does that mean he would have been included? Is Ajaz going to get in for his 10fer?
The Post
