Not that many. Matthew Tait is a superb, world class 7's player but cannot make that impact at full test level. Not yet anyway. What was the argument again? I've had a tough mental day at work %-)
Sir Geoffrey (Who, funnily enough, I bumped into at Headingley this morning!) was a damn fine 1 day player actually! I think he managed 147 N.O. on one occasion! > And how many rugby players play at the top level both in test rugby & > sevens? > > Do you think Boycott would have been a good 1 day or 20/20 player? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Walker > Sent: 18 April 2007 18:21 > To: Tim Leslie; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LU] Moving on ... > > > "Vaughan is a shrewd tactician and a good leader. He > is also a fine Test batsman. However, his record as a > one-day cricketer speaks for itself, and he should not > be chosen again." > > It's this sort of bollocks that does my head in. > You're either a good batter and can play at the > highest level or you can't. Surely a 'fine test > batsmen' should be averaging more that 20 in this > world cup ???? All the Aussies are managing to do it > and even some of our batsmen who haved proved > themselves at test level recently have managed to > average over 50 (Collingwood and Pietersen). So to say > Vaughan can't bat at one day level is like saying > Wayne Rooney would be no good at 5-a-side. What a > joke. Why can't the cricketing commentators say it how > it is. > > > _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist it's a God awful small affair
