• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Best South African opener?

Who was the better batsman?

  • Total voters
    19
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
People on this sub are hesitant to call Bumrah as an all time great despite picking 200+ Test wickets at an average of 19.4

The same people are okay with calling Barry Richards who played 4 Tests a better batsman than the guy who once held the record for most runs and most centuries and has multiple centuries against Roberts, Holding, Garner, Marshall, Imran, Hadlee, Willis, Thomson & Botham.
Click to expand...
I've been in record calling Bumrah an ATG, and if the aliens landed here he's on the shortlist to make the final XI as well. There's literally only one issue with him, and it has nothing to do with how many tests he played.

Barry is an ATG great because of how he played in FC, how he played vs touring test teams, WSC and how he played vs the very best bowlers of his era.

Luffy likes to pretend that he's discovered the 2nd greatest wicketkeeper batsman ever, that somehow everyone that's ever watched him missed. Barry is a batsman that was universally hailed as the best in the world for half a decade and an ATG. Which of those two then do you believe is more likely to be true.

Class has nothing to do with how many tests you've played, he was quite simply in the opinion of many, the best opening batsman of the modern era. He could literally do things that no opener since Hobbs in his pomp could.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
Barry Richards
4 Tests. 7 innings. 508 runs @ 72.57. 2 centuries.

Sunil Gavaskar’s first 4 Tests
4 Tests. 8 innings. 774 runs @ 154. 4 centuries.
Click to expand...
Yet no one, and I repeat no one in that era rated Sunny higher.

Go figure.

For the last time, he isn't rated solely on those tests. Anyone who things that lacks any kind of comprehension skills.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
sayon basak said:
Would Barry make your list if the list was purely based on tests?
Click to expand...
Barry played tests, hence he's eligible. He makes all of my lists and is my 9th ranked batsman of all time. When he played the ROW matches they were recognized as tests. WSC was a greater quality of matches than the tests than were concurrently played. And how do we know this, well the best players were all in WSC.

And even when Wisden made their lists it's not purely based on tests, it's a mixture of tests and first class and I imagine for guys like Wasim, a little helping of odi's. It's cricket.

Even Cricinfo had him make their 2nd AT XI, the same 2nd XI as Sunny, Imran, Lara, Knott, Hammond etc.

And yes, that was ahead of Smith and Mitchell.

But yeah, everyone here knows better.
 
h_hurricane

h_hurricane

International Vice-Captain
Barry Richards didn't even play as many tests as the number of characters in his first name. A WSC hero nevertheless. Unquestionably makes all time WSC team.
 
Last edited:
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
h_hurricane said:
Barry Richards didn't even play as many tests as the number of characters in his first name. A WSC hero nevertheless. Unquestionably makes all time WSC team.
Click to expand...
Yes that argument has been made.

So how about this.

Give a single qualitative argument for why Bruce Mitchell or Graeme Smith is better than Barry Richards and I'll give about 3 for Barry.
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Regular
The simple argument is we have no idea whether he would have become a legend or the next Graeme Hick/Mark Waugh
 
DrWolverine

DrWolverine

International Regular
If Vinod Kambli’s career ended with 10 Tests for some reason, he would have been called better than even Sachin Tendulkar but unlucky.

10 Tests. 937 runs @ 93.70
4 hundreds including 2 double centuries

Knowing our shitty and useless media, we would have called him as good as Don Bradman and would have placed him on best batsmen list with an asterisk.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
The simple argument is we have no idea whether he would have become a legend or the next Graeme Hick/Mark Waugh
Click to expand...
Besides calling names and looking at averages, what do you know about Graeme Hick?

Did you ever watch Hick bat?

Do you know that Hick was basically always known to be a flat track bully who specialized vs medium pacer trundlers?

There was no comparison between the two. None.

One was at his best vs the very best, one was at his worst.

You're just repeating long disproved talking points. Barry had a 14 year career, where he more than proved himslef.

Again, there's 0 comparison.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
Prince EWS said:
I think they would have been if they didn't have the opportunity to start disappointing in Tests - at least Mark Waugh anyway.
Click to expand...
Hick was never it.

Mark Waugh neither, and it took him quite a while to make it to the Australia test squad.

Barry proved himself for over a decade, all over the world and vs the world's best players.

These aren't the same.
 
OverratedSanity

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Anyone have the specifics of how many times Barry Richards got to face the great West Indian pacers of the 70s in FC/tour games? Didn't face them in WSC I think.
 
kyear2

kyear2

Hall of Fame Member
DrWolverine said:
If Mark Waugh had a career ending injury after 4 Tests(610 runs @ 54), he would have been hailed as one of the best ever but unlucky.
Click to expand...
Again, do you think Barry's status is based on his test average?

It really isn't.

You're just pushing a narrative that doesn't exist.

No one ever called Mark the best in the world, he was never the best of his siblings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top