George Headley vs Ken Barrington

[kyear2]

So then there's no huge difference in terms of actual output then.

None.

 

[Coronis]

Sutcliffe over Hutton is just pure fantasy. There's a hierarchy of English batsmen that starts with Hobbs, and goes through Hutton then Hammond.

Lara and Hutton are too low, Richards is wayyy too low. I know it's a meme and his "thing", but it's just lunacy.

He tries to prove some point that s/r doesn't matter and it seems for him that final average is the be all and end all.

I love when you dismiss other people’s opinions as fantasy, when they disagree with yours, and then use the fact that fans rate someone highly as a positive argument for a player in the same post. Just because you disagree doesn’t make it fantasy.

Its not a meme and I never tried to make it my thing, its an honest rating. Both Chappell and Gavaskar have similarly complete records, and both far exceed him in terms of centuries, and Chappell also far exceeds him in terms of matchwinning performance. I don’t think its crazy to rate either above him.

It really is not that big of a factor in tests, you can win/save matches with both fast scoring and slow scoring. We see this all the time.

If final average was the be all and end all Richards wouldn’t even make the top 30. You’re just grasping at straws and exaggerating wildly to try to discredit other peoples point of views as usual.

 

[Johan]

Shouldn't Ponting or Barrington be ahead on the basis of runs/inning or innings/ton? their output is really high and they have better tons/inning than Viv.

 

[Coronis]

Shouldn't Ponting or Barrington be ahead on the basis of runs/inning or innings/ton? their output is really high and they have better tons/inning than Viv.

Its not the only metric I rate players on.

 

[Johan]

Its not the only metric I rate players on.

Barrington's away numbers specifically are also quite a bit better

 

[DrWolverine]

Ken Barrington’s record is crazy good

 

[Coronis]

Barrington's away numbers specifically are also quite a bit better

Barrington also suffers on longevity. Whilst away performances are more important imo, and England was still the toughest place to bat (aside from NZ) his home record against the Windies and SA specifically is disappointing. He also played in a relatively flat era. There are many factors to consider.

 

[Johan]

Barrington also suffers on longevity. Whilst away performances are more important imo, and England was still the toughest place to bat (aside from NZ) his home record against the Windies and SA specifically is disappointing. He also played in a relatively flat era. There are many factors to consider.

a lot of flatness arguments would be true for Gavaskar too whom I have similar feeling as you have for Viv (you think Viv's output is too peak induced, Gavaskar's too dependent on two serieses, one against West Indies A). Anyway, Ultimately it's your list so I won't bother you much on it.

 

[Coronis]

a lot of flatness arguments would be true for Gavaskar too whom I have similar feeling as you have for Viv (you think Viv's output is too peak induced, Gavaskar's too dependent on two serieses, one against West Indies A). Anyway, Ultimately it's your list so I won't bother you much on it.

I mean their careers completely overlapped so its not the best argument? (I’m talking about their overall era). At this point I would say if I’m doing tiers of my list it would be

Bradman

Hobbs, Tendulkar, Sobers

Smith, Hammond, Lara (all subject to swap based on daily whim)

Sutcliffe, Hutton, Gavaskar, Chappell, Richards (probably the tightest tier )

Kallis, Barrington, Sanga, Ponting

Border, Waugh, Headley, Pollock (Dravid certainly is also part of this tier, others may also be)

Headley and Pollock both get bumped down a tier or two because of their lack of careers sadly.

 

[DrWolverine]

Tendulkar, Sobers

Smith, Lara (all subject to swap based on daily whim)

Hutton, Gavaskar, Chappell, Richards (probably the tightest tier )

Kallis, Barrington, Sanga, Ponting

Border, Waugh, Pollock (Dravid certainly is also part of this tier, others may also be)

Top 15 in the last 80 years

I may not agree with the exact order but looks good

 

[Johan]

I mean their careers completely overlapped so its not the best argument? (I’m talking about their overall era). At this point I would say if I’m doing tiers of my list it would be

Bradman

Hobbs, Tendulkar, Sobers

Smith, Hammond, Lara (all subject to swap based on daily whim)

Sutcliffe, Hutton, Gavaskar, Chappell, Richards (probably the tightest tier )

Kallis, Barrington, Sanga, Ponting

Border, Waugh, Headley, Pollock (Dravid certainly is also part of this tier, others may also be)

Headley and Pollock both get bumped down a tier or two because of their lack of careers sadly.

Personally, I believe your output being so dependent on two serieses with more questionable attacks in your favoured condition is worse than your output being peak dependent, but that's my personal view anyway.

if I'm to do tiers

Bradman




Hobbs

Sachin, Sobers, Viv, Hutton and Sobers

Smith, Lara, Hammond

Gavaksar, Sutcliffe, Chappell, Headley, maybe Border (he confuses me greatly)

Root, Kallis, Ponting, Dravid, Sangakkara, Pollock

obviously the gaps aren't big, if one asks me on Sachin vs Sangakkara I'll probably say it's still close but that's how I group them. I do rate Headley pretty highly because he had many years and his first class record against competent lineups is also stellar, Pollock is a weird one because his numbers against England are suspect to me so I generally keep him low.

 

[Coronis]

Personally, I believe your output being so dependent on two serieses with more questionable attacks in your favoured condition is worse than your output being peak dependent, but that's my personal view anyway.

if I'm to do tiers

Bradman




Hobbs

Sachin, Sobers, Viv, Hutton and Sobers

Smith, Lara, Hammond

Gavaksar, Sutcliffe, Chappell, Headley, maybe Border (he confuses me greatly)

Root, Kallis, Ponting, Dravid, Sangakkara, Pollock

obviously the gaps aren't big, if one asks me on Sachin vs Sangakkara I'll probably say it's still close but that's how I group them. I do rate Headley pretty highly because he had many years and his first class record against competent lineups is also stellar, Pollock is a weird one because his numbers against England are suspect to me so I generally keep him low.

Suspect how?

 

[DrWolverine]

.

if I'm to do tiers

Bradman




Hobbs

Sachin, Sobers, Viv, Hutton and Sobers

Smith, Lara, Hammond

Gavaksar, Sutcliffe, Chappell, Headley, maybe Border (he confuses me greatly)

Root, Kallis, Ponting, Dravid, Sangakkara, Pollock

Two Sobers

 

[Johan]

Suspect how?

in the 1970 ROW tour of England he averaged 27 I think, in the games against England with ROW before he didn't score either, his main success against England was the home series where I think the RPW of the series was higher than some of the flattest serieses of this millenium (BGT 2003 and 14) and the attack was pitful with Boycott having to bowl 25+ at instances.

I don't think I in good faith can shove Pollock in the top 15

 

[Coronis]

in the 1970 ROW tour of England he averaged 27 I think, in the games against England with ROW before he didn't score either, his main success against England was the home series where I think the RPW of the series was higher than some of the flattest serieses of this millenium (BGT 2003 and 14) and the attack was pitful with Boycott having to bowl 25+ at instances.

I don't think I in good faith can shove Pollock in the top 15

I mean I wouldn’t say that. And yeah I’m not looking at the RoW series, but he was very quality in England in 1965, it was a 3 test series, he scored almost 300 runs, 1 ton and 2 fifties it was low scoring and in particular he dominated this match, scoring 125 out of 269 in the first innings (shoutout to Cowdrey’s first innings as well (105 out of 240) whilst also scoring a crucial 50 in the second.

ENG vs SA Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Nottingham, August 05 - 09, 1965

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, ENG vs SA, South Africa tour of England 1965 at Trent Bridge, Nottingham dated August 05 - 09, 1965.

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[kyear2]

I love when you dismiss other people’s opinions as fantasy, when they disagree with yours, and then use the fact that fans rate someone highly as a positive argument for a player in the same post. Just because you disagree doesn’t make it fantasy.

Its not a meme and I never tried to make it my thing, its an honest rating. Both Chappell and Gavaskar have similarly complete records, and both far exceed him in terms of centuries, and Chappell also far exceeds him in terms of matchwinning performance. I don’t think its crazy to rate either above him.

It really is not that big of a factor in tests, you can win/save matches with both fast scoring and slow scoring. We see this all the time.

If final average was the be all and end all Richards wouldn’t even make the top 30. You’re just grasping at straws and exaggerating wildly to try to discredit other peoples point of views as usual.

Like you do with my opinions, all the time? So spare me your indignation.

After 86 tests Viv's average was 53.73, basically the same as Chappell's when he retired. They basically played in the same era, similar to Tendulkar and Kallis. Richards played on longer, past his prime, but many batsmen do.

For the entire time they played together, similar to the time Sachin played vs Kallis,.one was consistently and almost unanimously seen as the best of said era.

One makes every AT XI and was named one of the 5 players of the century.

But that isn't as bad as Sutcliffe over Hutton when the conditions under which they played and the opposition faced couldn't be further apart. Again, one makes literally every English XI and a plurality of World XIs and the other doesn't.

In the pantheon of British batting one stands along Hobbs and Hammond and the other doesn't.

You criticize my choices all the time with a self righteous and petty zeal. I'm just calling it as I'm seeing it.

 

[DrWolverine]

People have different opinions.

Considering the difference between Top 2-15 batsmen isn’t really that much and many of them have some weaknesses, rankings will vary.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I mean I wouldn’t say that. And yeah I’m not looking at the RoW series, but he was very quality in England in 1965, it was a 3 test series, he scored almost 300 runs, 1 ton and 2 fifties it was low scoring and in particular he dominated this match, scoring 125 out of 269 in the first innings (shoutout to Cowdrey’s first innings as well (105 out of 240) whilst also scoring a crucial 50 in the second.

ENG vs SA Cricket Scorecard, 2nd Test at Nottingham, August 05 - 09, 1965

Get cricket scorecard of 2nd Test, ENG vs SA, South Africa tour of England 1965 at Trent Bridge, Nottingham dated August 05 - 09, 1965.

www.espncricinfo.com

Yeah that Trentbridge innings is considered a classic knock by most people who watched it and looks superb from the footage too. Not sure how he got the idea that his runs in England aren't impressive.

A Graeme Pollock classic that immortalised Trent Bridge

At Trent Bridge in 1965, Graeme Pollock unleashed one of his many specials, helping South Africa win their first Test series in England after three decades.First published in 2007.

www.wisden.com

 

[kyear2]

in the 1970 ROW tour of England he averaged 27 I think, in the games against England with ROW before he didn't score either, his main success against England was the home series where I think the RPW of the series was higher than some of the flattest serieses of this millenium (BGT 2003 and 14) and the attack was pitful with Boycott having to bowl 25+ at instances.

I don't think I in good faith can shove Pollock in the top 15

One of the main reasons I rate Barry over Pollock, and I know no one would agree, is that Barry built up his reputation by scoring against the very best from around the world, and I think he scored vs better attacks and bowlers than Graeme did, even including tests.

Barry and Sobers faced off against better bowlers than Graeme did, at least in my estimation.

When tou then look at Barry's records vs said bowlers and vs touring teams, WSC etc. It really isn't that close to me.

But to each their own.

 

[capt_Luffy]

One of the main reasons I rate Barry over Pollock, and I know no one would agree, is that Barry built up his reputation by scoring against the very best from around the world, and I think he scored vs better attacks and bowlers than Graeme did, even including tests.

Barry and Sobers faced off against better bowlers than Graeme did, at least in my estimation.

When tou then look at Barry's records vs said bowlers and vs touring teams, WSC etc. It really isn't that close to me.

But to each their own.

Like how?? Barry and Pollock both faced the same Aussie attack in Barry's 4 matches and Pollock scored more.