pietersenrocks
U19 Vice-Captain
I concur, Flower brothers looked the only ones who could have scored some runs.
-
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.
CW Ranks the Batsmen
- Thread starter adharcric
- Start date
BoyBrumby
Englishman
1) KF Barrington
2) SR Waugh
A hideous injustice if Kenny isn't ranked in the top 25 batsman. His mastery of his peers in the 1960s was almost complete. More runs than anybody and only the great Sir Garfield averaged more, and then a tiny fraction of a run.
SRW's omission would be scarcely less so.
2) SR Waugh
A hideous injustice if Kenny isn't ranked in the top 25 batsman. His mastery of his peers in the 1960s was almost complete. More runs than anybody and only the great Sir Garfield averaged more, and then a tiny fraction of a run.
SRW's omission would be scarcely less so.
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ken Barrington
CB Fry
CB Fry
Michaelf7777777
International Debutant
Bert Suttcliffe
Steve Waugh
Steve Waugh
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
If there is one cricketer who symbolizes the dangers fraught in assessing relative skills of cricketers one hasn’t actually seen only on the basis of their statistics, Ken Barrington is one such. This is not to say he was not a batsman of note. Far from it. He was a very accomplished batsman who ground bowlers to dust and believed in occupation of the crease as the main purpose of a batsman’s existence. Stay at the crease and runs will come was the mantra that batsmen in England started to believe in fervently from the early fifties and by the sixties it had become a disease which stifled the game and caused wide-spread disenchantment with the game from the supporters. Long drawn battles of attrition and drawn game after drawn game played before ever scantier crowds became the name of the game. It is batsmanship of this type and the overall attitude of defensiveness that prevailed over the game in those dreary years that finally jolted the establishment to go for the radical innovation of the limited overs game to bring back the crowds.
Barington was a product of his times but he was a contemporary of Ted Dexter who was of the Dennis Compton school as far as attitude to the game is concerned. Unfortunately, fewer followed Dexter’s example in the English game and the game suffered its most boring period of all.
Many accolades are paid to Barington for his undoubted craft and skills. Here is a selection from my archives. All these are meant to be laudatory and appreciative but read carefully and you get the idea of the type of batsman that Ken Barrington personified. Remember some of these are written by his contemporaries and they belonged to the same school. As I said at the start, this is not to run him down but to put our wonder at his career batting average of 58.7 in perspective.
Trevor bailey, himself one of the most dour batsmen the game has ever seen, admires Barrinton but still finds his batting so devoid of colour that he admits he would prefer to watch Hanif Mohammad of Pakistan although the latter perhaps scored at a slower pace than Barrington. The he explains why …. Barrington’s batting was ugly !
There was another aspect to his batting besides the ennui it spread on cricket grounds around the world, he was selfish and okayed for his personal score - a la Sir Geoffrey
He was one of the few batsmen in the game to be dropped from the side for slow scoring - after he had scored a century in a Test match.
John Arlott in conversation with Trueman :
Trevor Bailey : Ken Barrington – The Accumulator
Barington was a product of his times but he was a contemporary of Ted Dexter who was of the Dennis Compton school as far as attitude to the game is concerned. Unfortunately, fewer followed Dexter’s example in the English game and the game suffered its most boring period of all.
Many accolades are paid to Barington for his undoubted craft and skills. Here is a selection from my archives. All these are meant to be laudatory and appreciative but read carefully and you get the idea of the type of batsman that Ken Barrington personified. Remember some of these are written by his contemporaries and they belonged to the same school. As I said at the start, this is not to run him down but to put our wonder at his career batting average of 58.7 in perspective.
Trevor bailey, himself one of the most dour batsmen the game has ever seen, admires Barrinton but still finds his batting so devoid of colour that he admits he would prefer to watch Hanif Mohammad of Pakistan although the latter perhaps scored at a slower pace than Barrington. The he explains why …. Barrington’s batting was ugly !
There was another aspect to his batting besides the ennui it spread on cricket grounds around the world, he was selfish and okayed for his personal score - a la Sir Geoffrey
He was one of the few batsmen in the game to be dropped from the side for slow scoring - after he had scored a century in a Test match.
John Arlott in conversation with Trueman :
It is as a maker of runs that Ken Barrington will be remembered.
His philosophy in Test cricket was quite simple; he believed that the longer he occupied the crease, the more the runs would come. He loved playing for England. He worked hard at it – and at making centuries for his country. In fact, Wally Grout once said that when Ken walked out to bat one could see a Union Jack waving behind him.
He’d always be in my England XI… because he was a great run-maker…. As a batsman he he no doubt gave the impression of being a dour sort of individual. Far from it. He loved a joke, a tale, a laugh.
At the time when he was heavily criticized as a slow scorer, he began to pace his innings – perhaps ‘organize’ it is a better way of putting it – so that he reached his century with a straight six back over the bowler’s head.
His philosophy in Test cricket was quite simple; he believed that the longer he occupied the crease, the more the runs would come. He loved playing for England. He worked hard at it – and at making centuries for his country. In fact, Wally Grout once said that when Ken walked out to bat one could see a Union Jack waving behind him.
He’d always be in my England XI… because he was a great run-maker…. As a batsman he he no doubt gave the impression of being a dour sort of individual. Far from it. He loved a joke, a tale, a laugh.
At the time when he was heavily criticized as a slow scorer, he began to pace his innings – perhaps ‘organize’ it is a better way of putting it – so that he reached his century with a straight six back over the bowler’s head.
Trevor Bailey : Ken Barrington – The Accumulator
He is one of the few automatic choices for England, a master batsman of world class, yet he does not possess the same box-office appeal as a number of players of of considerably less ability. . .
He has an inbred cautious streak…. One can imagine him as a dependable yeoman rather than a knight in shining armour and his weapons are more likely to be the broad sword or the cudgel rather than the rapier. The ordinariness and lack of colour are reflected in his batsmenship, which, although I admire it enormously, fails to excite me in the same way as that of Compton, or Kanhai or Neil Harvey. This has nothing to do with the fact that he gathers his runs slowly. Throughout his career he has probably scored consistently faster than Hanif Mohammad, but I prefer to watch the little master from Pakistan.
Why does Ken’s batting affect me this way? I believe that the cause is tied up with his unusual and highly individualistic technique which evolved over the years. Although it is undoubtedly effective, it is aesthetically rather ugly; like the music hall mother-in-law who is not pretty to look at and usually stays a long time. Of course, I much prefer, from the playing angle, a player who makes runs irrespective of style, rather than a man who looks good, but seldom does; yet at the highest level I have always expected the odd touch of uninhibited genius to break through from time to time.
(With Barrington) this happens on fewer occasions than any other great cricketer I have encountered. . . He has made run-getting a business so that at times he reminds me of a computer, admirably efficient but lacking in soul.
There are two failings in Barrinton's batting which both stem directly from his desire to sell his wicket dearly.
Alec Bedser in Cricket ChoiceHe has an inbred cautious streak…. One can imagine him as a dependable yeoman rather than a knight in shining armour and his weapons are more likely to be the broad sword or the cudgel rather than the rapier. The ordinariness and lack of colour are reflected in his batsmenship, which, although I admire it enormously, fails to excite me in the same way as that of Compton, or Kanhai or Neil Harvey. This has nothing to do with the fact that he gathers his runs slowly. Throughout his career he has probably scored consistently faster than Hanif Mohammad, but I prefer to watch the little master from Pakistan.
Why does Ken’s batting affect me this way? I believe that the cause is tied up with his unusual and highly individualistic technique which evolved over the years. Although it is undoubtedly effective, it is aesthetically rather ugly; like the music hall mother-in-law who is not pretty to look at and usually stays a long time. Of course, I much prefer, from the playing angle, a player who makes runs irrespective of style, rather than a man who looks good, but seldom does; yet at the highest level I have always expected the odd touch of uninhibited genius to break through from time to time.
(With Barrington) this happens on fewer occasions than any other great cricketer I have encountered. . . He has made run-getting a business so that at times he reminds me of a computer, admirably efficient but lacking in soul.
There are two failings in Barrinton's batting which both stem directly from his desire to sell his wicket dearly.
- First, for a player of his stature he seldom assumes complete control of a situation or systematically destroys an attack.
- Secondly, he has a tendency, in his pursuit of more runs, to overlook the practical considerations of a particular interest.
The image of Ken Barrington is of a dedicated run accumulator, who had inexhaustible patience and was England's sheet anchor. I wonder if Ken, given the chance to restart his career, would employ the same self demanding methods? No doubt he would stipulate better pitches and for bowlers to switch their attack from the leg to the off stump. He might not end with 6806 runs from 82 Tests. On the other hand he was so immensely talented that he might have exceeded even that impressive achievement. Surely he would have enjoyed his cricket more. Let it be said at once that I am far from denigrating Ken. I am merely nagged by a little fear that Ken's very dedication and effort stifled his enormous ability.
Adopting a two-eyed stance he eliminated all risks. The stroke maker became a highly efficient and functional machine. His stance automatically banished the off-drive unless the ball was generously over-pitched or short and (he) very much favoured his on-side strength. On-drives, pulls cuts and hooks became workday shots.
In his many long innings, his patience was limitless. It was a frugal approach (but) the stroke-makers of the day lke May, Dexter and Graveney benefitted as Ken blunted many an attack.
The danger of over-commitment to defense often means that many a bad ball goes unpunished. Ken could be criticised on this score and it was my unhappy lot as one of the selectors to agree to drop him for slow scoring in 1965 when he took seven and a quarter hours for 137 against New Zealand at Edgbaston....the decision had to be made at a period when every effort was being made to change the image of cricket as a spectacle. The game had sailed into doldrums mainly because the pitches largely encouraged the bowlers and an example was made of Ken.
Adopting a two-eyed stance he eliminated all risks. The stroke maker became a highly efficient and functional machine. His stance automatically banished the off-drive unless the ball was generously over-pitched or short and (he) very much favoured his on-side strength. On-drives, pulls cuts and hooks became workday shots.
In his many long innings, his patience was limitless. It was a frugal approach (but) the stroke-makers of the day lke May, Dexter and Graveney benefitted as Ken blunted many an attack.
The danger of over-commitment to defense often means that many a bad ball goes unpunished. Ken could be criticised on this score and it was my unhappy lot as one of the selectors to agree to drop him for slow scoring in 1965 when he took seven and a quarter hours for 137 against New Zealand at Edgbaston....the decision had to be made at a period when every effort was being made to change the image of cricket as a spectacle. The game had sailed into doldrums mainly because the pitches largely encouraged the bowlers and an example was made of Ken.
Last edited:
Magrat Garlick
Global Moderator
Kallis
Worrell
Worrell
adharcric
International Coach
Vote for #25 batsman of all-time
One last time, folks.
1. Don Bradman
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Garry Sobers
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Viv Richards
6. WG Grace
7. Wally Hammond
8. Brian Lara
9. Greg Chappell
10. Len Hutton
11. George Headley
12. Sunil Gavaskar
13. Herbert Sutcliffe
14. Ranji
15. Ricky Ponting
16. Victor Trumper
17. Everton Weekes
18. Graeme Pollock
19. Javed Miandad
20. Allan Border
21. Dennis Compton
22. Barry Richards
23. Clyde Walcott
24. Ken Barrington
The vote for the #25 batsman of all-time begins now.
One last time, folks.
1. Don Bradman
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Garry Sobers
4. Sachin Tendulkar
5. Viv Richards
6. WG Grace
7. Wally Hammond
8. Brian Lara
9. Greg Chappell
10. Len Hutton
11. George Headley
12. Sunil Gavaskar
13. Herbert Sutcliffe
14. Ranji
15. Ricky Ponting
16. Victor Trumper
17. Everton Weekes
18. Graeme Pollock
19. Javed Miandad
20. Allan Border
21. Dennis Compton
22. Barry Richards
23. Clyde Walcott
24. Ken Barrington
The vote for the #25 batsman of all-time begins now.
fredfertang
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
As it's the last one ........................
............. Steve Tikolo
............. Steve Tikolo
