Peter May vs Denis Compton

[Coronis]

Historically both by “experts” and most here, Compton has been rated clearly higher. Personally, I think as with Hill/Trumper, the case is not so clear cut.

Some relevant stats

May 4537 @ 46.77 13 tons 22 fifties 40 SR
Compton 5807 @ 50.06 17 tons 28 fifties 41 SR

Both were HTB’s but despite their career overlap May had much tougher overall conditions.

Thoughts?

 

[howitzer]

Judging purely by what they actually achieved in Test cricket in comparison to how difficult the conditions were I think May edges it. Compton was probably the better bat though, and unlucky to miss out on a large chunk of his peak to the war. May retiring early prevented him having a decline too, though maybe the dramatic easing up of conditions/weakening of bowling attacks c. 1962/63 might have prevented one anyway.

 

[a massive zebra]

Interestingly in the 70s and 80s May was widely considered to be the best batsman to debut for England since the war, yet there is no comparison between him and Barrington statistically.

 

[Aidan11]

Compton.

Better footballer too.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Both are better than Barrington

 

[Line and Length]

Both are better than Barrington

Not according to the CW poll from 2022.
Barrington came in at 21, Compton at 24 and May at 46.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

No according to the CW poll from 2022.
Barrington came in at 21, Compton at 24 and May at 46.

Yea that’s fair. All three are pretty close and underrated IMO.

 

[shortpitched713]

May had the much tougher conditions, and was more dominant in those conditions according to a thing that @Coronis posted.

 

[howitzer]

May had the much tougher conditions, and was more dominant in those conditions, according to a thing that @Coronis posted.

Yeah it's crazy. He dominated county averages in some wet years too. If it wasn't for the home/away split I'd rate him very highly, despite the relative lack of longevity.

 

[Johan]

they played 30 tests together, a very significant sample size which is 45% of May's career and 38% of Compton's, though one can argue that Compton missed May's big tests like second test of 1955 Ashes, though one can also argue Compton was a 33-year-old with permanent knee issues and career threatening injuries (1950-51 Ashes) combined with surgeries even before May showed up, in these matches, Compton outscores May even though he played two less innings, averaging a healthy bit higher too

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

from May's debut series (1951 South Africa) to Compton's retirement series (1957 South Africa), Compton averages higher too, 5 points higher and averages 2.4 more runs per inning.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

overall, I think it's Compton, even if they're about equal in quality (Think Compton's better there before Knee inflamation and surgeries), Compton had a 20 year long career and was very good in his mid 30s (the above stat has Compton at 32-39), keeping the skill to combat frontline South African attack of Adcock/Goddard/Tayfield even into his 40s while May only had a 10 year long career in comparison and was finished by the time he was 29/30.

@BazBall21 @MexicanRiver see if you find these points convincing enough.

 

[Johan]

Interestingly in the 70s and 80s May was widely considered to be the best batsman to debut for England since the war, yet there is no comparison between him and Barrington statistically.

Barrington just isn't rated it feels like. Definitely better than May and probably Compton too imo.

 

[Coronis]

Barrington just isn't rated it feels like. Definitely better than May and definitely Compton too imo.

ftfy

 

[Johan]

ftfy

I add that probably only because I don't know how Compton's numbers would look without the second world war, he was averaging 60+ before Knee inflamation in 1950 afterall, but from what we have, Yeah Barrington is definitely better. Compton is definitely better than May though

 

[shortpitched713]

Interestingly in the 70s and 80s May was widely considered to be the best batsman to debut for England since the war, yet there is no comparison between him and Barrington statistically.

That's why score adjusted statistics are better. Some players, like May simply play in matches which in the whole it was much tougher to bat, compared to others. And that's just a statistical quirk which can't be picked up by a simple reading of the raw averages.

 

[Johan]

I reckon the statistics of both Compton and May undersell their capabilities a bit, while also overselling Barrington's capabilities, but the gap between their away records is probably too much for any statistical deep dive to fill. though, I reckon the gap is not as much as the stats make it seem, especially since Compton is better at home and in West Indies, May is probably better at home and in WI as well. Barrington the greatest in Australia and in South Africa, and has an Asia record.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I reckon the statistics of both Compton and May undersell their capabilities a bit, while also overselling Barrington's capabilities, but the gap between their away records is probably too much for any statistical deep dive to fill. though, I reckon the gap is not as much as the stats make it seem, especially since Compton is better at home and in West Indies, May is probably better at home and in WI as well. Barrington the greatest in Australia and in South Africa, and has an Asia record.

Tbf Compton absolutely killed it in India during War. Pretty sure heard he had one of his very best here against Nisar, Mankad and Ghulam Ahmed.

 

[Johan]

they played 30 tests together, a very significant sample size which is 45% of May's career and 38% of Compton's, though one can argue that Compton missed May's big tests like second test of 1955 Ashes, though one can also argue Compton was a 33-year-old with permanent knee issues and career threatening injuries (1950-51 Ashes) even before May showed up, in these matches, Compton outscores May even though he played two less innings, averaging a healthy bit higher too

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

from May's debut series (1951 South Africa) to Compton's retirement series (1957 South Africa), Compton averages higher too, 5 points higher and averages 2.4 more runs per inning.

Batting records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

overall, I think it's Compton, even if they're about equal in quality (Think Compton's better there before Knee inflamation and surgeries), Compton had a 20 year long career and was very good in his mid 30s (the above stat has Compton at 32-39), keeping the skill to combat frontline South African attack of Adcock/Goddard/Tayfield even into his 40s while May only had a 10 year long career in comparison and was finished by the time he was 29/30.

footage of both men batting

 

[Johan]

Tbf Compton absolutely killed it in India during War. Pretty sure heard he had one of his very best here against Nisar, Mankad and Ghulam Ahmed.

Yeah I don't think the gap between Compton and Barrington is too much, Barrington wins for the Ashes performances and runs in South Africa, though, I reckon the Ashes sides Barrington destroyed weren't as powerful as the Invincibles or Lindwall's group

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah I don't think the gap between Compton and Barrington is too much, Barrington wins for the Ashes performances and runs in South Africa, though, I reckon the Ashes sides Barrington destroyed weren't as powerful as the Invincibles or Lindwall's group

It's just that Barrington's stats are too Much. Though reckon even 5 decades ago calling him better than either here, especially Compton, would be a huge hot take.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think had Compton retired when May did, i.e., when his knee injury resurfaced at age 30, I would probably rate him with the 2000s brigade. He was averaging 61 with 50 away by then; and 4 centuries vs Lindwall and Miller, with no one more than 2.