mr_mister
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Have been reading about these 3 guys recently.
Always assumed Worrell must have been the worst pure bat of the 3 due to the lower average and less centuries per test, but funnily enough when he batted in the top 5, he averaged 59 from 62 digs. This included batting a fair bit at 3, 4 and 5, as well as opening a few times
For some reason, possibly due to playing as an AR sometimes he batted quite a bit from 6-9(including 13 times @ 7) and averaged only 26 down there from 25 digs. Maybe he was happy to bat completely different down there? Threw his wicket away a bit perhaps.
Another cool thing about him, when he did ton up he went pretty big. 5 of his 9 tons were 150+ scores, including 2 unbeaten knocks in the 190s to go with 2 doubles. Also, his 4 best scores(261, 237, 197* and 191*) were all scored at different positions, opening, 3 4 and 5. He also had a decent record both in and against England
Weekes has the tremendous away average(and overall average), but did do far better against India, Pakistan and New Zealand's minnow bowling attacks than against Australia and England. He did get the 5 tons in consecutive innings though in his first year of test cricket, an amazing feat. He was shuffled around a bit too but far less than Worrell, mainly getting to bat at 4.
Walcott had an average nearly as good as Weekes, had a crazy peak of 11 tons in 16 matches during the 50s, and was also shuffled around the batting order a bit - no doubt due to being a keeper initially. He also managed 5 tons in 8 matches against Australia, but was a bit of a hometrack bully.
It's a hard one to call!
Always assumed Worrell must have been the worst pure bat of the 3 due to the lower average and less centuries per test, but funnily enough when he batted in the top 5, he averaged 59 from 62 digs. This included batting a fair bit at 3, 4 and 5, as well as opening a few times
For some reason, possibly due to playing as an AR sometimes he batted quite a bit from 6-9(including 13 times @ 7) and averaged only 26 down there from 25 digs. Maybe he was happy to bat completely different down there? Threw his wicket away a bit perhaps.
Another cool thing about him, when he did ton up he went pretty big. 5 of his 9 tons were 150+ scores, including 2 unbeaten knocks in the 190s to go with 2 doubles. Also, his 4 best scores(261, 237, 197* and 191*) were all scored at different positions, opening, 3 4 and 5. He also had a decent record both in and against England
Weekes has the tremendous away average(and overall average), but did do far better against India, Pakistan and New Zealand's minnow bowling attacks than against Australia and England. He did get the 5 tons in consecutive innings though in his first year of test cricket, an amazing feat. He was shuffled around a bit too but far less than Worrell, mainly getting to bat at 4.
Walcott had an average nearly as good as Weekes, had a crazy peak of 11 tons in 16 matches during the 50s, and was also shuffled around the batting order a bit - no doubt due to being a keeper initially. He also managed 5 tons in 8 matches against Australia, but was a bit of a hometrack bully.
It's a hard one to call!
