Reply to thread

Well now we're mostly just getting drawn into a semantics discussion. I said he's been a great opener. Using the phrase "a great" by itself (like you did there) is elevated praise beyond that, as if I am calling Warner a legendary player. "One of the greats". And no that's not what I mean when I say Warner has been a great opener.

I'd say finishing with around a 45 average and 8700ish Test runs qualifies an opener being called great rather than decent. If we're setting the bar at a 50 average and 10,000 runs we really don't have that many great openers from the last 30 years, do we?