In their own ways, Gower, Mark Waugh and Laxman were (technically speaking) anything BUT sound... and no-one would hail Kirsten/Chanderpaul/Mark Richardson as "easy on the eye". That said, I've no problem with any of that six... and would love to see a side with modern equivalents occupying the top 6 places.

My sole objection is to the disfiguring of the game through power hitting: I don't mind "ugly" cricket... but cricket is founded around a contest between bat and ball that is non-existent when batsmen are able to get away with going hard at anything other than rank long hops or the easiest of half volleys.

In your opinion then was Ian Botham disfiguring the game ?

As a bowler he added enormously to the game (at least in his first 5 years)... but as a batsman, yes, the similarities with Symonds are undeniable. He worked pretty hard at his batting and deserves credit for effectiveness... but I never liked his big-hitting.

In fairness, though, the principle manner in which he disfigured the game was through his attitude, temperament and lifestyle!

ps. I have no objection to batsmen striking boundaries off balls that ask for it, and I don't doubt that many of the best shots played by the likes of Symonds are indeed worthy of acclaim... but Botham never did succeed with the bat against the premier attack of his era (the WI) and cricket would, to my mind, be better off if players who try and impose themselves through power hitting were to routinely suffer a similar fate - though modern bats, modern pitches and so on do seem to play ever more into the hands of the limited but effective six hitters.

i dont agree with power hitting spoiling the game of cricket or "disfiguring" the game of cricket as u claim. the same power hitters u r talking about have made the game more interesting and also because most batsmen are more willing to take chances rather than leave every ball outside the off-stump. if not for these changes test cricket would be dying a slow death everywhere else except maybe in england.

i guess bowlers will have to come up with strategies to counter the power hitters like symonds and hayden. when the spinners r bowling and the field is brought in, u r hoping that the batsmen take their chances and go for the big ones and miscue them. whats wrong if they back themselves... go for it and hit out of the park.

if not for the power hitting of Gilly in the lower order or haydos up front and most other batsmen scoring quickly the aussies wouldn't have had as many victories as they do. it was the aussies who set the benchmark of 300 runs in a days play, and the sole reason why even 550+ in first innings didn't put Aus in a safe position at adelaide in 03-04 series against india.

i think we should be glad that we now see 80% of test matches ending up with a result and the guys who can score quickly down the order should be partly credited for that.

So Rachael, do we have the proof now that you didn't like Richards, Greenidge, Lloyd and Fredericks - all pretty much defined as power players by you. Add to this your hatred of pace bowling that 'wastes' the ball by not bowling constantly in the corridor, meaning you dislike Garner, Holding, Croft and Roberts.

Does this extend to a dislike of Rod Laver in tennis?

You've done a fair bit over the years to convince me that Viv was more like Gower than like Hayden, Symonds or Flintoff and Notts Exile convinced me to see beyond the cruder elements of Pietersen's game... and I've always had a lot of time for attacking bowlers who bowl at a good pace (which is why I took immediately to Asif, warmed rapidly to Simon Jones and am developing an interest in Steyn).

My aversion is primarily to batsmen destroying even half-decent bowling: I love to see seam-up bowlers attack with the new ball when the ball can be convinced to swing... and I don't mind if this leads to over-pitched deliveries that get despatched for four - but if a bowler chooses to bowl in the "corridor of uncertainty", the game NEEDS for there to be huge risks involved in batsmen trying to swing through the line of the ball.

I don't care who the bowler is: whether it's Sidebottom, Broad, Mills, Martin, Collymore, Bravo, Kallis, Clark or whoever... the guy should be able to turn at the top of his run up knowing (as bowlers on uncovered wickets with duke balls generally did in the heydey of the sport over here) that any batsman going hard at a well directed, good length ball is more likely to get out than to get runs.

Cricket, to my mind, needs three things it currently (as a rule) lacks:

1. Pitches that are (from the outset) two paced, with variable bounce, so that batsmen need to either get to the pitch of a half-volley or wait for the long-hop (and play late) in order to counter any movement.

2. Bats with small sweet spots that allow balls that are cleanly hit with great timing to be despatched... but which don't allow batsmen to get away so easily with mistimed shots or thick edges.

3. Balls with a far more pronounced (and hard-wearing) seam, that can be relied upon to cause deviation off the pitch for far longer than even the duke ball (let alone the blasted kookaburra) does.

With those three things in place I'd be far happier to see McCullum, Dhoni, Symonds and co swinging their arms... not least because I reckon they'd not only fail a lot more, they'd fail to impress as much as many less celebrated players who would be better able to deal with a genuine contest between bat and ball.

If you and me were captains picking from all the greats that ever played Rachael.

Viv & Bradman would be my first two choices as batters, probably with Steve Waugh my third.

Bowlers..

Lillee & Garner then probably Warne third.

If you go with Benaud's approach (a side you'd like to see go out and play, irrespective of whether it would count as the "best")... I'd perhaps struggle to narrow it down but might end up with something like:

Barry Richards
Len Hutton
David Gower
Brian Lara
Peter May
Mahela Jayawardene
Bob Taylor
Malcolm Marshall
Ray Lindwall
Alec Bedser
Bishan Bedi

That's not to suggest the inclusion of some/all of Hobbs, Bradman, Hammond, Sobers, Imran Khan, Lillee, Warne and Muralitharan would do anything other than strengthen the side... but what a side to behold