76: Andy Flower

63 Tests. 4,794 runs @ 51.54. 12 hundreds. 151 catches. 9 stumpings.

11 years. 2x good. 1x excellent. 3x outstanding.

The discussion

Let’s get straight into the discussion, because Andy Flower’s career is a real conundrum when it comes to accurately placing him in the Hall of Fame.

I’ll start with the numbers.

One of the surprising stats when you look at Flower’s career is the breakdown of his batting as a wicketkeeper against his time as a specialist batter.

It’s a small sample size, and hardly statistically significant, but Flower was by far a better performer as a wicketkeeper, than as a batter only. There’s not a lot one can read into this from the record, other than the fact that four of those Tests were the last four of his career, where he handed over the gloves to the emerging Tatenda Taibu. Those last four Tests yielded 242 runs at 30.25. It’s hard to infer what might or might not have been going on with Zimbabwe cricket at the time, but given the events of the 2003 World Cup, I think it’s fair to say that there were likely many off-field challenges that all of the players were having to navigate. For the nation, and their cricket side, it was an unsettled time, to say the least. Nonetheless, let’s see how that career average compares to other wicketkeepers with 1000 or more Test runs (as the team’s designated wicketkeeper).

Here's where the statistical argument for Andy Flower as a great wicketkeeper-batter gains real momentum. His average is 2nd when you consider his career in this context, and rare too! Only 10 other players have scored 1000 Test runs as a wicketkeeper and averaged over 40. If you look at this statistic alone, there is an argument that Flower should be much higher up this list.

Speaking of wicketkeeping, let’s not gloss over the other half of the wicketkeeper/batter combination. If we have a look at the great wicketkeeper/batters in the modern era, many of them have given up the gloves at various stages of their career (Kumar Sangakkara, AB de Villiers and Brendon McCullum spring to mind), either due to injury, or the extreme workload that a wicketkeeper/batter has to endure. Andy Flower, for the most part, held on to the gloves until the very twilight of his career. I don’t remember much about Flower’s wicketkeeping, other than that it was tidy, professional and no-fuss. Pretty much like the rest of his career, really. What does stand out as impressive was the degree of difficulty that his role in the side, and his side’s place in Test cricket put him under. The relative strength of both the batting and bowling units meant that Flower spent more time in the field than just about any other wicketkeeper of his era, and given that he often scored the lion’s share of the runs, he was at the crease early, and often. On reflection, his impact on the team, and the circumstances under which he performed so highly over the course of his career make a case alone for inclusion in the Hall of Fame.

From a legacy perspective, the impact that he has had on cricket in Zimbabwe cannot be understated. For a team that didn’t win many Test matches, look at his record in winning and drawn Tests.

Those are Herculean numbers, backed up by the almost staggering stats from his three peak series. It highlights the stark contrast between his team’s fortunes when he played well and the lack of success when he failed. Furthermore, it shows how well he had to perform, just to give his side a chance of winning or drawing a match. That he was able to do it so often in his career came as a big surprise, to me at least, when you consider how few times Zimbabwe actually did win or draw during his career.

But in what context do you place his record, when it is pretty clear that for most of his career there were few (if any) other world-class players in that Zimbabwe side? What would his record look like had he been able to bat against his own bowling attack, or even play in a side with other quality players around him? Players with whom he could depend upon for long partnerships, or even just the psychology of not being ‘the only guy’ every time you walk out to bat? All the pressure was on Andy Flower to score all the runs — the opposition would plan for him more than they would for any other player in his side.

And then there is the impact of him being a wicketkeeper to a poor(er) bowling attack, which results in longer hours in the field, which would have further strained his capacity for concentration and sapped his seemingly inexhaustible stores of physical energy. We mentioned that above, in the context of the discussion around Flower’s wicketkeeping. If you had a statistic for ‘most time spent on the field’ as a percentage of the total time played, I am almost certain that Andy Flower leads this category for players in his era, if not all-time.

Of course, few Test-playing countries have endured such turbulence in their cricket administration, or the administration of their nation. Whatever your thoughts on the role of sports in politics (or politics in sport), Andy Flower’s and Henry Olonga’s decision to take a stance to highlight the dire political and humanitarian situation in their homeland was incredibly brave. The repercussions, both personally and professionally, were mammoth, and they must have considered the potential for some even more frightening consequences. As it was, Flower was forced to retire from international cricket and to leave his home country, thus ending his outstanding Test career.

The verdict

So, is Andy Flower in the right spot here at 76?  On one hand, he is one of only ten players in the history of Test cricket to score 1000 runs as a wicketkeeper at an average of over 40. His average as a wicketkeeper is a staggering 53.7, second all-time among qualified keepers.

When comparing to other pure batters with a similar average (51.54), there are a number of players who will feature higher on this list because they have significantly more Test runs to their name, such as Ricky Ponting (51.85) and Shiv Chanderpaul (51.37). Others, with similar numbers of runs like Denis Compton (5807 @ 50.06), Sir Frank Worrell (3860 @ 49.48) and Neil Harvey (6149 @ 48.41) all appear below Andy Flower on this list.

What I struggled with was how much of a ‘bonus’ to give Flower because he played for Zimbabwe, as opposed to one of the larger Test cricket nations. In the end, he received a bump up the list because of the ‘degree of difficulty’ of the opposition he faced (and by extension the lack of quality around him). Looking at it another way, his perhaps slightly more modest collection of total runs, hundreds, fifties and rate of hundreds (all at or outside the top 75) is more than offset by:

a)     he was a wicketkeeper as well,

2)     he managed to impact winning, even in a struggling side, and

d)      he didn’t get to play against Zimbabwe.

Have I got his ranking correct? You be the judge. If I’m honest with myself I could be convinced that Andy Flower belongs higher on this list, perhaps as high as the next tier up — The Squad. It would take a convincing argument, but I could be persuaded.

But regardless of where you rank him, I think everyone would want to play alongside Andy Flower. What an incredible cricketer.

In one word

Brave

Notes

Bio

Record

Source: ESPN CricInfo

career peak

Source: ESPN CricInfo