The Waugh's or The Chappell's

[Wicked Lester]

This morning on SEN listeners were asked to phone in their nominations for great sporting families at an international level (the Schumachers were the winners according to the commentators).

One caller nominated the Waugh brothers at which point Jason Richardson (I think it was him) said, "good one, but I don't think they're even Australia's greatest cricketing family".

"Who is?" replied an astonished Daniel Harford.

"The Chappells" said Richardson.

Harford disagreed.

But it raised a very interesting point. Having seen both of their careers pretty much in their entirety (I missed the early part of Ian Chappell), my vote sits firmly with the Chappells too.

Greg was the batting maestro, Ian the tenacious fighter - they batted at 4 and 3 respectively, shouldering more of the harder work than the Waugh's, with Mark at 4 and Steve generally at 5 or 6.

They arguably played during a tougher period too, with helmets arriving half way through Greg's career, often playing on poorly prepared wickets and having to hit the fence to record a boundary.

The Waugh's have the edge in bowling, while the Chappell's have the edge in fielding. Both Chappell's captained their country with success.

The aggregate runs they all scored mean little by way of comparison with the Waughs playing in an era of far more tests being played. Batting stats put the Chappells on top. ODI stats mean little too with the One day era arriving towards the end of the Chappells careers.

Anyway FWIW I'd have the Chappells in my team in front of the Waughs, but interested to see what others think.

If at the end of your deliberations you see it as a tie then consider this: Trevor > Dean - astonishing but true.

[Squizza]

Chappells for sure. Greg is arguably Australia's greatest ever batsman.

[Romeo]

The Chappells because I never thought much of Mark Waugh as a batsman but the Chappells' records probably stand up better. I think Mark Waugh is overrated and didn't perform that often under pressure but was talked up by the commentators more than almost anyone I can remember.

[crazy_big_al]

not sure

[Wicked Lester]

Well I think I'd have the Don in first place, but I certainly agree that Greg Chappell is Australia's second greatest batsman - though IMHO Ponting is closing in on that mantle.

I think it is often forgotten how good he actually was. A collosus in the era in which he played and undoubteldy one of the most attractive batsman I've ever seen.

Ian too, is underappreciated at present, perhaps because in the contemporary scene all the good batsman average 50 or more, and most average over 45.

Ian's average of 43 was pretty good in his day and of course he averaged 50 batting at number 3. Also, not included in Ian's stats is the 71/72 ROW tour and WSC. His figures are a lot more impressive with these inclusions. Same applies with Greg - the missing 7 international centuries scored during these periods deflate his record to a poultry 24 centuries at 53.86. :rolleyes:

[Ice goddess]

Chappells easily. Greg is the pick of the four as a batsman, he had a flawless technique and would have an even more impressive record if WSC and the World XI games were added. He was one of the few to consistently average 50 during his era and was never dropped from the test team. Ian's relatively modest record belies how good he was and he was a great pressure player. Both were super slippers with Greg being a great all-round fieldsman. Mark Waugh was a pretty good slipper but not outstanding as a batsman as his record shows. Steve was a great fighter but it took a while for his average to reach 50 and it was bolstered by playing against the minnows which the Chappells never did.

[crownie]

id probaly say Chappells as i would have Mark ranked the lowest.

but all 4 were good/great cricketers for Australia

[crownie]

id probaly say Chappells as i would have Mark ranked the lowest.

but all 4 were good/great cricketers for Australia

[Partridge]

id probaly say Chappells as i would have Mark ranked the lowest.

but all 4 were good/great cricketers for Australia

Chappells easily. Much, much tougher era. No crap sides. Plus you had chunks of their careers not included - ROW in 71/72 plus WSC. The Gregorys are reasonably successful Australian cricket family - plus the Harveys. Of course there are other cricketing families from outside Australia - Mohammads for one.

If you're making it worldwide for all sports it's astonishingly difficult, you'd have to do some serious research.

[Romeo]

Yes the Chappells it seems have the consensus vote.

[scooter600x]

If you're talking families, the Chappell's grandpappy went OK, too.