Richards, Smith, Lara, Hammond

[HouHsiaoHsien]

I have listened to quite a few contemporaries of the 60s/70s crossover and they are solidly Sobers. It may not be unanimous though.

Points in Sobers favour are a better long term peak, more monster series. Points in Viv’s favour: his short term peak(better than Sobers’ cause of the era, bowlers and SR), more rounded record, SR(ability to change a match within a session).

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Lillee, purely as a bat, rated Viv the best

 

[peterhrt]

I have listened to quite a few contemporaries of the 60s/70s crossover and they are solidly Sobers. It may not be unanimous though.

Both Sobers and Viv Richards had their advocates. Also Lara.

Botham said Richards was the greatest batsman ever, but they were mates. Imran said Richards treated him as a medium-pacer. Hutton preferred Gavaskar who was much more like himself. Bedser ranked Gavaskar behind Merchant.

Both Richards and Sobers were very attack-minded, especially against fast bowlers. It was claimed that Sobers didn't have a forward defensive stroke. He was sometimes under-rated as a batsman by those focussing on his all-round skills. Bradman thought Graeme Pollock was the best left-handed batsman he saw. Michael Melford of the Daily Telegraph also placed the South African ahead. Benaud rated Kanhai the leading West Indian of the early 1960s. But during that decade as a whole most went for Sobers, who was consistent throughout it.

 

[peterhrt]

Lillee, purely as a bat, rated Viv the best

Interesting, as Lillee had ups and downs against both.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Interesting, as Lillee had ups and downs against both.

Lillee dismissed Viv often, but overall Viv averaged 48.73 against him, and in WSC 50+, that too at a great SR, and his best performance came in the series that showcased WI as the best team in the world(1979 series in Aus). So I’d say Viv has a very favourable record against him.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Lillee dismissed Viv often, but overall Viv averaged 48.73 against him, and in WSC 50+, that too at a great SR, and his best performance came in the series that showcased WI as the best team in the world(1979 series in Aus). So I’d say Viv has a very favourable record against him.

Sobers' 254 for Rest of World XI against Lillee in '71 is very highly rated though....

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Sobers' 254 for Rest of World XI against Lillee in '71 is very highly rated though....

Amazing innings. Probably the best ever after Gooch, Perera and VVS.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Amazing innings. Probably the best ever after Gooch, Perera and VVS.

Lara, Botham, Hanif and Bradman are up there as well

 

[kyear2]

Copying part of a previous post. Strike rates refer to first-class cricket.

Hutton scored at 35 runs per hour and Sutcliffe 34. Sutcliffe largely escaped criticism but not Hutton. There was a certain amount of hypocrisy involved. Nobody minded Hutton batting slowly against Australia but at other times it was different. Compton was one critic:

His class was way, way above all but a tiny few in any era, but to me it was all the more puzzling that he remained suspicious and defensive and allowed all types of bowlers to dictate to him on good wickets, when he should have been the boss...As the years went by and I watched him plod against inferior attacks, I could not fathom why.

During the 1950s there was an anti-professional captain agenda in England and also West Indies. The implication was that professional captains like Hutton encouraged dull cricket.

While I understand the final paragraph, the highlighted portion dies have merit if it were indeed true.

I do recall reading that they neutralized Ramadin and Valentine, but did so by basically padding out most of the deliveries (likely would have been given out in later eras).

Though it must be said that Compton supposedly didn't have the greatest s/r either.

 

[kyear2]

Both Sobers and Viv Richards had their advocates. Also Lara.

Botham said Richards was the greatest batsman ever, but they were mates. Imran said Richards treated him as a medium-pacer. Hutton preferred Gavaskar who was much more like himself. Bedser ranked Gavaskar behind Merchant.

Both Richards and Sobers were very attack-minded, especially against fast bowlers. It was claimed that Sobers didn't have a forward defensive stroke. He was sometimes under-rated as a batsman by those focussing on his all-round skills. Bradman thought Graeme Pollock was the best left-handed batsman he saw. Michael Melford of the Daily Telegraph also placed the South African ahead. Benaud rated Kanhai the leading West Indian of the early 1960s. But during that decade as a whole most went for Sobers, who was consistent throughout it.

Excellent post as always.

It wasn't unheard of to place Kanhai as not only the best batsmen from the West Indies, but in the world during that time. At least the most talented and technically sound. His numbers however never backed that up.

Also with Pollock, was he that great, or the fact that he and Richards were such "what if" cricketers that there were some novelty involved. He didn't prove himself around the world in 1st class and WSC like Barry did and I've read more than one report that he was suspect vs pace.
But yeah he, like Sobers seems to have been very attacking and talented batsmen.

 

[Coronis]

Both Sobers and Viv Richards had their advocates. Also Lara.

Botham said Richards was the greatest batsman ever, but they were mates. Imran said Richards treated him as a medium-pacer. Hutton preferred Gavaskar who was much more like himself. Bedser ranked Gavaskar behind Merchant.

Both Richards and Sobers were very attack-minded, especially against fast bowlers. It was claimed that Sobers didn't have a forward defensive stroke. He was sometimes under-rated as a batsman by those focussing on his all-round skills. Bradman thought Graeme Pollock was the best left-handed batsman he saw. Michael Melford of the Daily Telegraph also placed the South African ahead. Benaud rated Kanhai the leading West Indian of the early 1960s. But during that decade as a whole most went for Sobers, who was consistent throughout it.

A good example of peer bias imo.

 

[peterhrt]

A good example of peer bias imo.

Bedser was one of Merchant's biggest fans, claiming he was the best overseas batsman on a rain-affected English pitch, followed by Harvey. Like Trumper, Merchant practised in nets soaked with water and allowed partially to dry.

Hutton was an admirer of Gavaskar and disagreed that Merchant was better.

 

[peterhrt]

It wasn't unheard of to place Kanhai as not only the best batsmen from the West Indies, but in the world during that time. At least the most talented and technically sound. His numbers however never backed that up.

Also with Pollock, was he that great, or the fact that he and Richards were such "what if" cricketers that there were some novelty involved. He didn't prove himself around the world in 1st class and WSC like Barry did and I've read more than one report that he was suspect vs pace.
But yeah he, like Sobers seems to have been very attacking and talented batsmen.

Yes Benaud said Kanhai was the best batsman in the world in 1961.

With six years experience Graeme Pollock was considered a seasoned Test player. He and leg-spinner Denys Hobson agreed to play for Packer, but objections that they had not played county cricket and regularly taken the field with non-white cricketers led to their invitations being withdrawn.

Pollock relied more on timing than Sobers, who hit the ball very hard, and at his best made batting look easy. Oddly he was out of form more often than one might expect. Against the fastest bowling he was not quite as destructive as Sobers, but when pushing forty got a couple of quick hundreds in unofficial Tests against Sylvester Clarke, Ezra Moseley and Franklyn Stephenson. He also made good hundreds against Snow (twice) and Lillee.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yes Benaud said Kanhai was the best batsman in the world in 1961.

With six years experience Graeme Pollock was considered a seasoned Test player. He and leg-spinner Denys Hobson agreed to play for Packer, but objections that they had not played county cricket and regularly taken the field with non-white cricketers led to their invitations being withdrawn.

Pollock relied more on timing than Sobers, who hit the ball very hard, and at his best made batting look easy. Oddly he was out of form more often than one might expect. Against the fastest bowling he was not quite as destructive as Sobers, but when pushing forty got a couple of quick hundreds in unofficial Tests against Sylvester Clarke, Ezra Moseley and Franklyn Stephenson. He also made good hundreds against Snow (twice) and Lillee.

??? Why does playing with non-white cricketers led them to get uninvited to WSC??

 

[peterhrt]

I do recall reading that they neutralized Ramadin and Valentine, but did so by basically padding out most of the deliveries (likely would have been given out in later eras).

Though it must be said that Compton supposedly didn't have the greatest s/r either.

It was May and Cowdrey who padded Ramadhin away in 1957.

Hutton played spin from the crease. Before his knee injury became more serious in 1949, Compton had very quick footwork and came down the pitch to all but the fastest bowlers. Just before his knee went, Compton scored a triple century in South Africa in three hours.

 

[peterhrt]

??? Why does playing with non-white cricketers led them to get uninvited to WSC??

It was because they hadn't played regularly with non-white cricketers, having not played county cricket. The objections came from certain Boards of Control, thought to be West Indies and Pakistan.

 

[kyear2]

It was because they hadn't played regularly with non-white cricketers, having not played county cricket. The objections came from certain Boards of Control, thought to be West Indies and Pakistan.

And honestly can see why. If I'm not mistaken (and I could be) he preferred to play domestic cricket in SA than ply his trade on the county scene.

That could have been (and in no way saying that it was the case) construed that he was supportive or in agreement with the government's stance. Again, not saying he was, but could have been looked at that way.

Honestly it was unfortunate that they didn't get to have longer careers, but the real tragedy was definitely the situation that existed in the country.

We tend to downplay or have forgotten about it now, but even in the cricket landscape, forget about playing teams of color, they objected to individual players of color.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And honestly can see why. If I'm not mistaken (and I could be) he preferred to play domestic cricket in SA than ply his trade on the county scene.

That could have been (and in no way saying that it was the case) construed that he was supportive or in agreement with the government's stance. Again, not saying he was, but could have been looked at that way.

Honestly it was unfortunate that they didn't get to have longer careers, but the real tragedy was definitely the situation that existed in the country.

We tend to downplay or have forgotten about it now, but even in the cricket landscape, forget about playing teams of color, they objected to individual players of color.

Krom Hendricks, Basil D'Oliveira...... Was reading an article on non-white apartheid era cricketers and read about Frank Roro; who was highly regarded as the best black African batsman, given the epithet 'Dusty Don'. On the turn of the century, he was one of the 10 players shortlisted for Greatest South African cricketer award by CSA (alongside Aubrey Faulkner, Barry Richards, Mike Procter, Allan Donald, Jimmy Sinclair, Clive Rice and fellow African natives Basil D'Oliveira and Eric Pietersen; Graeme Pollock won the award). Ofcourse, most of the white sports journalists had little to no interest in him, as they did for Howa Bowl ..... It was there I read a comparison between him and Barry Richards; as the writer questioned Richards' status of being the best African batsman. But really, even if Barry haven't played many Tests, he still has the WSC and his performance in the counties; for Roro, we truly have no measure, no clear idea on the quality of oppositions, not many interested journalists and not even his proper stats. We only know that pitches used to be abysmal in the Howa Bowl, where there are 3 recorded instances of teams crossing the score of 400 runs in all of its history and he averaged around 100 there. Barry Richards, Graeme Pollock, Mike Procter, Clive Rice, etc. being wasted on not getting the opportunity to play Test properly is a huge tragedy, but atleast we have ideas of their capabilities; we practically can't know much, if anything; about Roro and his ceiling.

 

[Coronis]

And honestly can see why. If I'm not mistaken (and I could be) he preferred to play domestic cricket in SA than ply his trade on the county scene.

That could have been (and in no way saying that it was the case) construed that he was supportive or in agreement with the government's stance. Again, not saying he was, but could have been looked at that way.

Honestly it was unfortunate that they didn't get to have longer careers, but the real tragedy was definitely the situation that existed in the country.

We tend to downplay or have forgotten about it now, but even in the cricket landscape, forget about playing teams of color, they objected to individual players of color.

Sad thing is WSC may have inticed him to play county cricket.

 

[kyear2]

Don't want to go down this rabbit hole, and I know sensibilities weren't quite the same back then.

But why did England and Australia continue to play them?