Bill Athey
Richard Montgomerie
Murray Goodwin
Chris Adams
Michael Bevan
Javed Miandad
Tony Greig
Imran Khan
Franklyn Stephenson
Vaspert Drakes
Mushtaq Ahmed
I'd say you're possibly only looking at a limited number of aspects.
I agree that Dexter was imaginative - and had to be - bearing in mind he had to cope with the new concept of one day cricket and all that. However, while Dexter was a nifty batsman, Adams is no slouch either, and I wouldn't call him conservative when batting - I'd say he's often quite flamboyant. I do take your point about going out to not lose a game, as opposed to winning it, but for me this is a strength in Adams. He is a canny tactician in the field; who relies on batters AND bowlers to win matches.
It helps that he is blessed with having a world-class match-winning bowler (although Dexter also had that in the form of John Snow), so in that sense, there wouldn't be much to choose.
Adams' other strength is getting the best out of a team made up of - in the most part - kids and journeymen. Plus he has achieved something no other Sussex captain has ever done - win the Championship - and he has done it three times.
There resteth my case for Grizzly.
This is the closest to my first XI from those players I have seen. Presumably Bev will have the gloves and Grizzly the skipper.
I would have Snowy in for Vasbert Drakes and Michael DiVenuto for Bill Athey.
Bloody Hell that would be a side to see wouldn't it !
It's a close call but Dexter is well ahead as a batsman. Dexter was an England regular at a time when England were well-served by batsman, Adams didn't make the grade as test cricketer. If you just considered captaincy, then Adams might just shade it (you can't argue with three championships) but as a batsman, there's no comparison.
And that's the case for Lord Ted.
Or Keith Greenfield.
Or Dennis Foreman?
Or Dennis Foreman?
DiVenuto for Athey!!! DiVenuto was made to look good by some of the players around him. Thats why he has been at the mighty Derbyshire since.
Or Allan Green.
We could get into semantics here
...