PlayerComparisons
International Vice-Captain
Two ATGs
Not really a proper answer.... But anyways, found it hysterical that you think newer players are always better than older players with similar records; but Larwood is still better than Philander, despite having much worse longevity, a much higher average and tbh; one really good series.I rate Larwood over Philander because I wanted the ABC series Bodyline and thought he was cool - it’s an online forum where there is zero analytical basis for anyone’s assertions. Internal consistency is unecessary
contribution to cricket historyNot really a proper answer.... But anyways, found it hysterical that you think newer players are always better than older players with similar records; but Larwood is still better than Philander, despite having much worse longevity, a much higher average and tbh; one really good series.
Apparently doesn't work for the first non English cricket superstar.....contribution to cricket history
That would be Ranji, and no I don’t consider either as they were premodern insofar as they came from an era where test cricket had not established itself as the superior form of the game. That changed by Larwoods tApparently doesn't work for the first non English cricket superstar.....
Ranji played for England, i.e., English. And Trumper, you call it Test, FC whatever; was clearly the best batsman of a generation. Larwood won't make a Top 100 bowler's list without considering his FC record. He averages 35 outside of Bodyline, which ofcourse, was tailor made for him.That would be Ranji, and no I don’t consider either as they were premodern insofar as they came from an era where test cricket had not established itself as the superior form of the game. That changed by Larwoods t
ranji was better than trumper and also, who cares. It’s like saying homo habilis was better the Neanderthal manRanji played for England, i.e., English. And Trumper, you call it Test, FC whatever; was clearly the best batsman of a generation. Larwood won't make a Top 100 bowler's list without considering his FC record. He averages 33 outside of Bodyline, which ofcourse, was tailor made for him.
Neanderthal man was better for the record.ranji was better than trumper and also, who cares. It’s like saying homo habilis was better the Neanderthal man
This would be an interesting comparison.ranji was better than trumper
Do you know whether there are any question marks over Ranji's FC average of 56; as it seems to good to be true for his era. 12 runs over Trumper and 6 even more than Hobbs himself; sounds a bit....This would be an interesting comparison.
Ranji and Fry (average 50) played for Sussex. Their home ground at Hove was the best batting pitch in the country.Do you know whether there are any question marks over Ranji's FC average of 56; as it seems to good to be true for his era. 12 runs over Trumper and 6 even more than Hobbs himself; sounds a bit....
Clearly my ass. Hill has almost identical stats in both tests and FC and was better in England and SARanji played for England, i.e., English. And Trumper, you call it Test, FC whatever; was clearly the best batsman of a generation. Larwood won't make a Top 100 bowler's list without considering his FC record. He averages 35 outside of Bodyline, which ofcourse, was tailor made for him.
Oh please..... For the record Mohammad Yousuf and Ricky Ponting have identical stats. Hill never reached the highs of Trumper 1902; neither he had health issues like Vic.Clearly my ass. Hill has almost identical stats in both tests and FC and was better in England and SA
He had health issues after his test career lolOh please..... For the record Mohammad Yousuf and Ricky Ponting have identical stats. Hill never reached the highs of Trumper 1902; neither he had health issues like Vic.
Wrong. He pretty much suffered with bad health throughout his career post 1902.He had health issues after his test career lol
And that just means he never had the lows Trumper did either.