Sydney Barnes vs Imran Khan

[PlayerComparisons]

Two top tier ATGs

 

[kyear2]

Different era of the game that should be kept and rated separately. Never seen his bowl, and can't even be sure of what he bowled. So Imran..

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Oh **** off

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Has to be Barnes.

 

[Migara]

Imran.

Not to be fooled by Barnes' average. Once adjusted to the era it becomes somewhere 20-21, which Imran averages too. Then Imran can bat.

 

[ankitj]

Pretty much impossible to objectively compare their careers and stats. Voted Barnes because he has been regarded as the best ever in past.

 

[Coronis]

Imran.

Not to be fooled by Barnes' average. Once adjusted to the era it becomes somewhere 20-21, which Imran averages too. Then Imran can bat.

Too bad its a bowling comparison.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Imran putting up near Barnes averages during his peak without the same level of minnow bashing is enough for this to be clear imo.

 

[Patience and Accuracy+Gut]

Imran putting up near Barnes averages during his peak without the same level of minnow bashing is enough for this to be clear imo.

Worth considering that is comparing Imran’s peak to Barnes whole career. Also add the sheer impact per match Barnes made in every match. 7 Wickets a match and he was playing with a fine attack himself.

Barnes was well regarded as The Greatest bowler to ever walk this planet by everyone which Imran never was. That was pretty much the consensus in the first 100 years of cricket. That’s a long time, no bowler ever has held that position for a such a long period of time. One can still make a case for Barnes in The Goat Debate which I don’t see for Imran.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Worth considering that is comparing Imran’s peak to Barnes whole career. Also add the sheer impact per match Barnes made in every match. 7 Wickets a match and he was playing with a fine attack himself.

Barnes was well regarded as The Greatest bowler to ever walk this planet by everyone which Imran never was. That was pretty much the consensus in the first 100 years of cricket. That’s a long time, no bowler ever has held that position for a such a long period of time. One can still make a case for Barnes in The Goat Debate which I don’t see for Imran.

Imran during his peak succeeded across more varied conditions, which Barnes didn’t face

 

[subshakerz]

Worth considering that is comparing Imran’s peak to Barnes whole career. Also add the sheer impact per match Barnes made in every match. 7 Wickets a match and he was playing with a fine attack himself.

Barnes was well regarded as The Greatest bowler to ever walk this planet by everyone which Imran never was. That was pretty much the consensus in the first 100 years of cricket. That’s a long time, no bowler ever has held that position for a such a long period of time. One can still make a case for Barnes in The Goat Debate which I don’t see for Imran.

Once we see clips of Barnes, pretty clear he wasn't the greatest ever.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Barnes 1901-1914:


Imran 1980-1986:


Same number of wickets at an even better average against probably a better set of opposition and wider variety of conditions. The point that this is Barnes whole career spread across 15 years (rather than a 6-7 year peak) is very valid. Still, I think a dominant peak period like this is so impressive that I'd still give it to Imran overall.

 

[subshakerz]

Barnes 1901-1914:
View attachment 41037

Imran 1980-1986:
View attachment 41038

Same number of wickets at an even better average against probably a better set of opposition and wider variety of conditions. The point that this is Barnes whole career spread across 15 years (rather than a 6-7 year peak) is very valid. Still, I think a dominant peak period like this is so impressive that I'd still give it to Imran overall.

Yeah nobody in the modern era was close to pulling near those sort of numbers.

Barnes is kinda like Lohmann. Outrageous numbers but in iffy era.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Barnes 1901-1914:
View attachment 41037

Imran 1980-1986:
View attachment 41038

Same number of wickets at an even better average against probably a better set of opposition and wider variety of conditions. The point that this is Barnes whole career spread across 15 years (rather than a 6-7 year peak) is very valid. Still, I think a dominant peak period like this is so impressive that I'd still give it to Imran overall.

That 7 WPM is worth noting though

Yeah nobody in the modern era was close to pulling near those sort of numbers.

Barnes is kinda like Lohmann. Outrageous numbers but in iffy era.

Barnes is definitely not like Lohmann, who was rated like 3rd best of his own time. Lohmann is like an Axar Patel, his record was iffy even in his own time and the SA he faced was even below FC standards.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Imran during his peak succeeded across more varied conditions, which Barnes didn’t face

Hard Australian surfaces, wet English ones and matted wickets in SA..... But overall, I think his WPM is insane, especially given he played in a pretty strong bowling side with Blythe, Rhodes, Foster, Woolley (at his bowling peak, actually has crazy numbers), etc.

 

[kyear2]

Worth considering that is comparing Imran’s peak to Barnes whole career. Also add the sheer impact per match Barnes made in every match. 7 Wickets a match and he was playing with a fine attack himself.

Barnes was well regarded as The Greatest bowler to ever walk this planet by everyone which Imran never was. That was pretty much the consensus in the first 100 years of cricket. That’s a long time, no bowler ever has held that position for a such a long period of time. One can still make a case for Barnes in The Goat Debate which I don’t see for Imran.

I'm not trying to discredit older players, but I also don't think they can be ranked alongside more contemporary ones.
Everyone has a cut off point, mine just happens to be post the first world war / 1930's.

One such reason is having only one valid opponent, and he capitalized heavily on playing against SA.

And 83 wickets from 7 games @ 8, from an overall career sample of 27 games disproportionately impact his overall numbers.

Those are my only pints.

 

[HouHsiaoHsien]

Hard Australian surfaces, wet English ones and matted wickets in SA..... But overall, I think his WPM is insane, especially given he played in a pretty strong bowling side with Blythe, Rhodes, Foster, Woolley (at his bowling peak, actually has crazy numbers), etc.

I still feel Imran faced a wider set of conditions, and certainly more batting friendly conditions(I would praise someone like Hobbs for succeeding on sticky wickets, matted wickets wtc, not Barnes that much since they were a challenge for batsmen more than the bowler). But that aside, and especially on WPM, you make a fair point

 

[capt_Luffy]

I still feel Imran faced a wider set of conditions, and certainly more batting friendly conditions(I would praise someone like Hobbs for succeeding on sticky wickets, matted wickets wtc, not Barnes that much since they were a challenge for batsmen more than the bowler). But that aside, and especially on WPM, you make a fair point

Yeah, Imran had it tougher with conditions and oppositions; but honestly, elsewise it would had been a massacre by the statistic phenomenon of Barnes. It's really really tough to rate him and is one of the major reasons I emphasis on his WPM, a stat mostly remaining constant with the ages, being stupidly high.

 

[kyear2]

Yeah, Imran had it tougher with conditions and oppositions; but honestly, elsewise it would had been a massacre by the statistic phenomenon of Barnes. It's really really tough to rate him and is one of the major reasons I emphasis on his WPM, a stat mostly remaining constant with the ages, being stupidly high.

His wpm comes from averaging almost 12 wpm vs SA? At an average of 9.

How is that not factored into the argument?

 

[peterhrt]

There was nothing wrong with Australian pitches in Barnes' day. They were good for batting. Clem Hill averaged 53 for South Australia, Noble and Trumper 52 and 49 respectively for NSW.

Dave Nourse (Dudley's father) averaged 60 in first-class cricket in Australia.