Compton is one of those players for whom simply quoting the numbers will never do him any kind of justice.Compton averaged 60 at home, 36 away - why so much love for him?
Well, that line can be used to describe many cricketers over the years but surely performances (as measured by statistics) mean something and such a glaring disparity between home and away averages says something about his (adapt)ability? What was so special about him that this should be overlooked in his case? Genuine question here, don't know too much about Compton.Compton is one of those players for whom simply quoting the numbers will never do him any kind of justice.
Partly the way he played & partly the era he played in, I think. What I've read of him suggests he was a dashing stroke maker and post-war Blighty was a pretty grim place. The Austerity Years are well named; rationing was still in place and the country was almost bankrupt after WW2. Compton played when the mass media was starting to bring cricket into people's homes via the wireless (or the newsreel at the cinema) so people could actually see & hear this handsome, suave, boys-own hero flaying the Australians with no small amount of style and it was, I imagine, a welcome distraction. Cricket in the early 50s was almost as popular as association football and it's hardly an exaggeration to say Denis was in no small way responsible for this. It's the "how" as much as the "how many" sometimes, which is fairly ironic given I also voted for Kenny Barrington who's the antithesis of that ideal.Compton averaged 60 at home, 36 away - why so much love for him?
after pinging his troublesome knee and missing most of the English summer, to witcertainly not helped by his series in Australia in 50/51 when he scored 53 runs at an average of 7!
ThisDravid
Kallis