• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen Countdown Thread

Logan

U19 Captain
Suttcliffe was ranked somewhere in 25 to 30.

I am talking about the top 100 list out of which they voted top 25. I think even likes of Mohd. Azharuddin were there in the top 100 shortlist.

Edit: Rank 1 to 50 in that exercise are mentioned here: http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/16644-espn-s-legends-cricket.html
My Top 12 peeves in that list. The list happened in 2000.

1. Warne at number 4.

2. No Barrington

3. Lillee ahead of Marshall

4. Botham ahead of Hadlee

5. Walsh ahead of Holding, Garner and Roberts.

6. Barry Richards who played a total of 4 Tests ahead of Brian Lara

7. Greame Pollock who played a total of 22 Tests is ahead of Len Hutton

8. Mike Procter who played a total of 7 Tests is ahead of Allan Donald and Curtly Ambrose

9. George Headley who played a total of 22 Tests is ahead of Allan Border.

10. Bishan Singh Bedi being Top 50 is a joke

11. Viv Richards was great. But not Top 3.

12. The order of Garner-Roberts-Holding-Ambrose.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
According to Wikipedia:
His batting improved with the quality of the opposition; he averaged 39.87 in the County Championship, 45.63 in first-class cricket, 58.67 in Test cricket and 63.96 against Australia.

I'm quite sure he didn't purposely raise his game depending on the competition, but his first-class record should be looked into. Someone who has access to the stats can do it. But does it really matter that much? Noone cares that much about the first-class stats of modern cricketers, for example.
Is it simply because he played first class cricket in formative years, and test in latter years? He became a regular member of the test team when he was 28+ in age.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
My Top 12 peeves in that list. The list happened in 2000.

1. Warne at number 4.

2. No Barrington

3. Lillee ahead of Marshall

4. Botham ahead of Hadlee

5. Walsh ahead of Holding, Garner and Roberts.

6. Barry Richards who played a total of 4 Tests ahead of Brian Lara

7. Greame Pollock who played a total of 22 Tests is ahead of Len Hutton

8. Mike Procter who played a total of 7 Tests is ahead of Allan Donald and Curtly Ambrose

9. George Headley who played a total of 22 Tests is ahead of Allan Border.

10. Bishan Singh Bedi being Top 50 is a joke

11. Viv Richards was great. But not Top 3.

12. The order of Garner-Roberts-Holding-Ambrose.
Yeah Warne probably should have been 1 or 2 but ranking him 4 is at least reasonable, if slightly low
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Is it simply because he played first class cricket in formative years, and test in latter years? He became a regular member of the test team when he was 28+ in age.
533 FC games so that's what at least 350 county games? I'm not sure how many tour games he'd play

But yeah youd think he played plenty after he turned 28 too unless he was literally a ~33 avg scrub like Labuschagne pre 25 so could never grind that FC average up to 50 no matter how much he improved. That would explain it actually. No way is Lab getting his FC average to 50
 
Last edited:

ma1978

International Debutant
Ken Barrington, who passed away unexpectedly and well before his time, was also known universally as an absolutely fantastic human being who was seen as a mentor for a whole generation of crickets. Its good to see someone with that reputation get some recognition. I suspect that had he lived for another 30 years, people would have a lot more to say about him today.
 

Coronis

International Coach
And would we hold it against Labuschagne if he ended up averaging 55+ in tests and ~45 in first class?
 

_00_deathscar

International Regular
So 4 out of top 7 are batsmen who played their entire careers in last 30 years. Over representation for this generation?
No. The game has gotten tougher, there are more ATGs on either side of the spectrum, and even the 'lesser' teams and/or minnows have players who are in contention for ATVG (or level below that) spots.

Playing v India in the early 1900s is very different to playing Bangladesh in 2010.
 

morgieb

Request Your Custom Title Now!
True because I feel a giant chunk of Steve Smith's FC cricket these days are tests. How much shield cricket has he even played since turned unstoppable in 2014

Barrington played a **** ton of county so averaging 39 in it is just odd.
One thing I read about the Barrington gap is that The Oval tended to be a dog track during the 1950's with Lock, Laker and Bedser in their primes, so wasn't easy for batting.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
No. The game has gotten tougher, there are more ATGs on either side of the spectrum, and even the 'lesser' teams and/or minnows have players who are in contention for ATVG (or level below that) spots.

Playing v India in the early 1900s is very different to playing Bangladesh in 2010.
Sure. But in a purely statistical exercise, batting and bowling cannot together appear to have strengthened (or weekend) in an era. Qualitative improvement in both disciplines will cancel each other out in statistics. More cricket being played by a larger pool of cricketers might be the explanation.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
533 FC games so that's what at least 350 county games? I'm not sure how many tour games he'd play

But yeah youd think he played plenty after he turned 28 too unless he was literally a ~33 avg scrub like Labuschagne pre 25 so could never grind that FC average up to 50 no matter how much he improved. That would explain it actually. No way is Lab getting his FC average to 50
Which shows how much career averages are impacted by when a player played cricket and when they didn't. This is why longevity points matter -- they compensate for negative impact of long careers on career averages. Although that may only work on average, but not in each and every case.
 

Migara

International Coach
According to Wikipedia:
His batting improved with the quality of the opposition; he averaged 39.87 in the County Championship, 45.63 in first-class cricket, 58.67 in Test cricket and 63.96 against Australia.

I'm quite sure he didn't purposely raise his game depending on the competition, but his first-class record should be looked into. Someone who has access to the stats can do it. But does it really matter that much? Noone cares that much about the first-class stats of modern cricketers, for example.
You will find that Sangakkara also has the same trend. Mediocre in school cricket, average in U19, 44ish in FCC and 57 in tests.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
BTW Barrington has the highest quality points of all batsmen so far (825). No reason for not rating him really.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
According to Wikipedia:
His batting improved with the quality of the opposition; he averaged 39.87 in the County Championship, 45.63 in first-class cricket, 58.67 in Test cricket and 63.96 against Australia.

I'm quite sure he didn't purposely raise his game depending on the competition, but his first-class record should be looked into. Someone who has access to the stats can do it. But does it really matter that much? Noone cares that much about the first-class stats of modern cricketers, for example.
That statement sounds weird and redundant. Don't the County cricket and Test cricket averages get combined to obtain the FC cricket average?
 

Top