Looking back at the history of New Zealand's contests against England, one man stands out above all others: Sir Richard Hadlee. Of course, he was outstanding against just about any opponent, especially in the 1980s, a decade when the Black Caps could hold their own against anyone apart from, perhaps, the mighty West Indies.
It's 40 years ago this week when the man with giant feet made his Test debut against Pakistan (an uneventful draw) followed soon after by a first ODI at Christchurch (home win). On both occasions, the 21 year-old failed to make a good impression but by the time he retired in 1990, he was recognised as one of the all-time greats of New Zealand and one of the finest all-rounders of his generation. And that was in the era of Wasim Akram, Ian Botham, Kapil Dev and Imran Khan. Like most of the aforementioned legends, Hadlee was first and foremost a fast bowler but his batting was good enough for his average to be higher than his bowling average in both Tests and ODIs. Only Imran could match that rare achievement.
In an era when spin bowlers have smashed all Test wicket-taking records, it is curious to recall that Hadlee was the first man to claim 400. His career tally of 431 in only 86 matches was eventually eclipsed by Kapil Dev, before Courtney Walsh, Warne and Murali kicked on into the stratosphere. However, his average of 22.29 remains sensational and his ODI figure was even better. Add in the 3124 Test runs at 27 and it's easy to see how the statistics stack up in his favour. However, it was his easy-going Kiwi personality and skill at the clever fast-medium stuff at a time when fast bowlers were better known for fearsome bouncers that made Hadlee an icon for the age. That and the fact he represented one of the weaker cricketing nations.
His first limited-overs appearance against England came at Dunedin in March 1975 but he wasn't the only Hadlee playing that day. In fact, John Edrich's side were faced with three brothers, Richard and his elder siblings Barry (a batsman) and Dayle, a fellow seam and swing merchant. The young man took 2-21 in seven overs but weather intervened before he had a chance to bat. It wasn't until the eighties when the world really began to take notice. Even as the World Series Cricket superstars returned to the fold, Hadlee was as good as any of them. In a three-Test home series against Clive Lloyd's West Indies, he took a symmetrical 19 wickets at 19 apiece, including 11-102 in a thrilling one-wicket victory at Dunedin. He even carbed 68 runs in a very low-scoring game.
He saved some of his best performances for Australia, and took 77 wickets in only 12 Tests in away series against the green baggies. Such was his consistency that his only failure came on the 1976 tour of Pakistan. He made only two centuries (against the Windies and a weak Sri Lanka) but came mighty close 29 years ago at Christchurch. 'Paddles struck a rapid 99 before taking eight cheap wickets as NZ thrashed England by an innings. A one-man show if ever there was one!
Sux years later I recall being at Chelmsford for the tourists' game against Essex, a regular feature of the county calendar in those days. It was just days after Hadlee had been made 'Sir Richard' and, although he was being rested for the Lord's Test, when he came on briefly as a substitute fielder, the crowd rose as one to applaud cricket's newest knight. The following week, I think, he thumped another run-a-ball eighty-something then in his Test farewell at Edgbaston, he signed off with a five-for, albeit in a losing cause.
Sir Richard Hadlee was always particularly popular in England where he represented Nottinghamshire with distinction for many summers. He was one of the few in the past fifty years to achieve the 100 wickets/100 runs double in the first-class season and was always at or close to the top of the bowling averages. His career statistics in the first-class game are remarkable: 1,490 wickets at 18.11 alongside more than 12,000 runs at almost 32. In one-dayers, he contributed more than 5000 runs and 454 wickets but, as I wrote earlier, pure numbers don't tell the whole story. Do you reckon the current selectors will sneak him into the side against England next week? Even at the age of 61, he probably wouldn't weaken the attack too greatly.
