• 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.

How Good Was Sydney F Barnes?

Line and Length

Cricketer Of The Year
A lot has been posted about Sydney Barnes in various ATG discussions. Just how good was he?

The passages below are excerpts from an article which appeared in "Roar" under "All-Day-Roseville-All-Day"

Sydney Francis Barnes was born 150 years ago this week, on 19 April 1873. It’s timely for him to again be acknowledged as one of the greatest bowlers ever.

Unfortunately we can’t directly compare him with modern greats such as Glenn McGrath, Malcolm Marshall and Shane Warne. Instead we must rely on statistics, and on those who having seen Barnes, then watched cricket right through to the 1970s.

In 2013, Wisden named him Barnes in an all-time World XI that marked 150 years of its Cricketers’ Almanack. In 2009, he was an inaugural member of the ICC Cricket Hall of Fame. When the “ICC Best-Ever Test Championship Ratings” were published in 2008, Barnes’s 932 in 1914 was the highest achieved.

As no-one alive now ever saw Barnes, peers’ opinions must suffice. Here are some, years later-

“The best of ‘em today is half as good as ‘Barnie.’” England great Wilfred Rhodes in 1973

“He was the finest bowler there ever was.” England ex-captain Arthur Gilligan in 1967

“If Barnes wasn’t the greatest bowler ever born, he was so close to it that it doesn’t matter.” Historian and ex-Australian player Johnny Moyes in 1950.

In 27 Tests, Barnes took 189 wickets at 16.43. His combination of average, strike-rate and workload will never be matched.

His aggregate was a record until Clarrie Grimmett passed it in 1936, after delivering 13,500 balls to Barnes’ 7,873. Only George Lohmann has 100 wickets at a lower average. Barnes’ team-mates’ collective average in the same games was almost double at 29.59.

Barnes’ seven wickets per match is unsurpassed. The closest are the 1890s’ Tom Richardson (88 wickets at 6.29 per game) and Lohmann (112 at 6.22), and Muttiah Muralitharan (800 at 6.02). He also claimed a wicket every 41 deliveries. Only Kagiso Rabada has more at a better strike-rate.

The calibre of Barnes’ victims was high, the most frequent being Victor Trumper (13 times) and Clem Hill (11). Both fell more often to Barnes, than to any other bowler.

In the 1911/12 Ashes tour. at the MCG, a ‘flu-stricken Barnes produced a first-morning spell matched only by that of Stuart Broad at Trent Bridge in 2015. Here are three accounts-

“Barnes was magnificent. When the first six Australian wickets were down, his bowling showed: Overs, 11; maidens, 7; runs, 6; wickets, 5. This on a perfect wicket, and I look back on it as the finest bowling that I have ever witnessed.” Jack Hobbs

“I played three different balls. Three balls to play in a split second- a straight ‘un, an in-swinger and a break back ! Then along came one which was straight half-way, not more than medium pace. Then it swerved to my legs, perfect for tickling around the corner for a single. But the ruddy thing again broke across after pitching, quick off the ground and took my off stump !” Clem Hill

“There had never been a more astounding piece of bowling than this on a perfect piece of turf. His control was superb. Though conditions favoured the batsman, this man could get five of them in eleven overs for 6 runs.” Johnny Moyes

Barnes’ biggest weapon was termed the “Barnes ball.” It swerved into batsmen, dipped late in flight, and after pitching moved away. He also possessed one that did the opposite, swerving away before moving back in. And by spinning the ball from the front of the hand, he could conceal its movement in a way that a wrist-spinner could not.

Here are some descriptions by leading contemporaries-

“On his great Australian tour he clean-bowled Victor Trumper at the height of his powers, a ball swerving from the leg stump to the off and then breaking back to hit the leg. It was the sort of ball, that a man might see when he was tight. I was at the other end, I should know.” Charlie Macartney

“On a perfect wicket Barnes could swing the new ball in and out very late, could spin from the ground, pitch on the leg stump and miss the off.” Clem Hill

“He relied on disguised changes of pace and of break, which he never overdid. His best ball was one, very nearly fast, which pitched on the leg-stump to hit the top of the off, sometimes even on a good wicket.” CB Fry

“Most deadly of all was the ball which he would deliver from rather wide on the crease, move in with a late swerve the width of the wicket, and then straighten back off the ground to hit the off stump. The secret of his mastery, though, was strictly and supremely physical- the supple steel of his fingers and hand.” Harry Altham

James Anderson was recently judged the world’s number-one bowler, at age 40. Barnes’ Test career was ended at the same age by WWI’s onset. However he kept playing professionally and between ages 54 and 57, in his final 11 first-class matches, claimed 60 wickets at 16.68.

When aged 55, he took 7/51 and 5/67 for Wales against the West Indies, who rated him the best bowler they faced during their tour. He then claimed 6/58 and 2/29 against county champions Lancashire.

When aged 56, he twice dominated the touring South Africans. For Minor Counties he took 8/41 from 32 consecutive overs and 1/19, and for Wales he claimed 6/28 and 4/62. The performances helped earn him fifth position in that season’s averages.

For Staffordshire until the age of 62, he took 1,441 wickets at 8.15, mostly against first-class counties’ Second XIs. And as a club pro until the age of 67, he took 4,069 wickets at 6.08.

His tally from Tests down to leagues was a phenomenal 6,229 wickets at 8.33.
 

Ali TT

International Vice-Captain
It is likely that a modern batters would have less trouble with Barnes than his contemporaries. However, that doesn't change the fact that Barnes was way ahead of his peers and did things they couldn't even dream of. I wonder if he had a bit of an arsenal of tricks like Ajantha Mendis, who for a short while was unplayable until teams used film to work him out-something not available in the early C20th? Barnes obviously bowled seam up as well.

I've never seen it said that Barnes was a trend-setter though - did others try and copy his variations that then became part and parcel of cricket?

Definitely an ATG.
 

Socerer 01

International Captain
cricket has changed too much to merit a direct comparison between him and more modern players

he will always be an atg for his achievements and longevity regardless, one of those players you can call pioneers
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
I reckon he was ahead of his time, wouldn't be that special these days and even if he grew up in the modern era, I think at best he'd be one of the better bowlers around today.

But I think what made him special was that he bowled with all the skill and professionalism that players a century later brought to the field. That's something absolutely worthy of being lauded. Unlike Bradman though, who I think even now would be something of a statistical anamoly, I don't think Barnes brought anything to the game that would dominate in quite the same way in an era of better pitch quality.
 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
I reckon he was ahead of his time, wouldn't be that special these days and even if he grew up in the modern era, I think at best he'd be one of the better bowlers around today.

But I think what made him special was that he bowled with all the skill and professionalism that players a century later brought to the field. That's something absolutely worthy of being lauded. Unlike Bradman though, who I think even now would be something of a statistical anamoly, I don't think Barnes brought anything to the game that would dominate in quite the same way in an era of better pitch quality.


When Ian Peebles moved from his native Scotland to London in 1926 at the age of eighteen, he began working with the former Test all-rounder Aubrey Faulkner at his indoor school. The two men hoped that Peebles would emulate the success of Sydney Barnes, regarded for most of the twentieth century as the greatest bowler of all time. Peebles, when he joined Faulkner, could bowl the same finger-spun fast leg-break that made Barnes so formidable. But although he could produce this delivery at will in the indoor nets, he soon completely lost the ability to do so outdoors in competitive cricket.
http://www.fabulousbookfiend.com/2021/09/guest-review-spinners-yarn-by-ian.html

Aubrey Faulkner tried to teach the Scottish spinner Ian Peebles ‘the Barnes ball’, but in the end it proved too difficult a task.

And so Barnes remains unique among bowlers because his finger spun leg and off breaks have never been duplicated with the same skill, pace, drift and accuracy.

If Barnes were bowling in the 2020s then Smith, Kohli, Root and Williamson would suffer in exactly the same way as Trumper, Hill, Faulkner and Macartney suffered.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
Genuinely think he'd be seen through today as fast as any mystery spinner, probably faster cos he's not a spinner.
 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
Genuinely think he'd be seen through today as fast as any mystery spinner, probably faster cos he's not a spinner.
Even Wilfred Rhodes bowled medium-fast if the skipper asked him to open the bowling. But of course once the shine left the ball he reverted to his usual slow left-arm spinners. The same goes for Barnes.

So whether you call Barnes fast-medium or a spinner depends entirely on the number of overs bowled in the innings and the state of the ball. The quality of the pitch would have also been a factor.

’Golden Age’ bowlers were actually very versatile.
 

Athlai

Not Terrible
I don't at all disagree, I just don't think it's a versatility that would make much difference in this era.
 

Starfighter

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Even Wilfred Rhodes bowled medium-fast if the skipper asked him to open the bowling. But of course once the shine left the ball he reverted to his usual slow left-arm spinners. The same goes for Barnes.

So whether you call Barnes fast-medium or a spinner depends entirely on the number of overs bowled in the innings and the state of the ball. The quality of the pitch would have also been a factor.
Good job on demonstrating you know little about Barnes' style.
 

trundler

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Doesn't Bedser's career pretty much prove that Barnes would be a stock bowler on true pitches? Not that it matters when rating Barnes.
 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
I don't at all disagree, I just don't think it's a versatility that would make much difference in this era.
If you bowl a spinning ball at pace then you will get your wickets via the Magnus Effect. If you slow the pace of the ball then you will get your wickets via pronounced turn off the pitch.

Either way it’s all good, especially if you have skill, control and accuracy of Barnes.
 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
Doesn't Bedser's career pretty much prove that Barnes would be a stock bowler on true pitches? Not that it matters when rating Barnes.
Barnes‘ average in Australia was 22 (13 Tests). Bedser’s average was 32 (11 tests).

If we assume that most of those Tests were played in good weather/pitch conditions then that average of 22 is excellent. But yeah, I’d have to check the weather reports and pitch conditions of the day.
 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
Good job on demonstrating you know little about Barnes' style.
There’s not actually much to learn as his methods are fairly easy to understand….


I could hear the clink of cups and saucers inside the pavilion. “Would you like a coffee, Mr Barnes?” But he was lost in deliberation. “Sobers I like. Batting or bowling, he attacks. That’s the thing – attack, attack. A gamble, of course, for a left-hander against someone like me.” Holding an imaginary ball, SF sketched three deliveries with a flick of his long fingers – the first two pitching and beating the outside edge, the last breaking the other way through the gate.

“Even so, an ideal pitch for cutters?” I persisted. “Possibly. I was a spinner, not a cutter.” His expression had clouded again at my apparent confusion. There was no classification in my MCC coaching manual for a fast-medium spin bowler, though I had heard how he made the ball swerve in the air before bouncing and breaking sharply either way.

The patented Barnes Ball was the leg-break delivered at pace and without rotation of the wrist. It was at its most potent on the matting tracks of South Africa when, at the age of 40, he took 49 wickets in four games, still a record for a Test series. Fielders at mid-off and mid-on reported hearing the snap of his fingers as he bowled, the batsmen unable to read which way the ball would break. In that respect he was the Ramadhin or Muralitharan of his day. But whereas they were spinners using a front-on action and freakish articulation of the arm, SF’s spin was derived purely from the twist exerted by his fingers rather than through leverage of the wrist or elbow. In his opinion the cutter, delivered when the bowler drags his fingers down the side of the ball, was a much inferior cousin.

 

HookShot

U19 Vice-Captain
Doesn't Bedser's career pretty much prove that Barnes would be a stock bowler on true pitches? Not that it matters when rating Barnes.
Uncannily Barnes was able to be more effective with his varied armoury than any other bowler during his playing career, but also under any conditions. Take, for example, one of his greatest feats – at Melbourne in the 2nd test of the 1911/12 ashes series. In one of the most remarkable spells in test history, on a shirt-front perfect batting wicket he took four wickets for one run in seven overs, and altogether in this spell, 5 for 6 in 11 overs, with 7 maidens. The wickets were those of some of Australia’s greatest players – Bardsley was yorked by his first ball, followed quickly by Kelleway lbw, Hill bowled, and Armstrong caught by the wicket-keeper. Trumper he did not dismiss on this occasion.
 

Migara

International Coach
The issue with the contempories was that they were yet to see the greatest bowlers of all time. Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran, Murali, Warne and Donald all came after these accounts.

The best way to assess is to standardize. I think his average hovers around 20.5 - 21.0 after standardizing, which is ATG.

So was he ATG - Yes
Was he among the best - Yes
Was he twice better than the next - No.
Was he the best - No
 

Coronis

International Coach
The issue with the contempories was that they were yet to see the greatest bowlers of all time. Marshall, McGrath, Steyn, Ambrose, Hadlee, Imran, Murali, Warne and Donald all came after these accounts.

The best way to assess is to standardize. I think his average hovers around 20.5 - 21.0 after standardizing, which is ATG.

So was he ATG - Yes
Was he among the best - Yes
Was he twice better than the next - No.
Was he the best - No
Nobody says he is Bradman-like.

Whether he is the best is a matter of opinion, and its far from a crazy one to have, compared to many on this forum.
 

Top