DoG's Top 100 Test Batsmen - The Top 25

[Spikey]

take your stupid long posts elsewhere ****s

 

[MW1304]

I feel like we've all let DoG down by letting these boring ****s come to the party. Did we even invite them

 

[smash84]

DoG is getting free publicity he wouldn't mind.....get on with it again you two

 

[Hurricane]

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/48208-bowling-strong-bowling-unit-vs-without.html

They can take part of the discussion into this thread if they havn't run out of steam yet.

 

[benchmark00]

ikki the only bloke I've seen write a five page haiku.

 

[Days of Grace]

For the love of all that is holy, can you guys shut the **** up about WPM. This is about batsmen, FFS.

This should help...


6. Len Hutton (England) (1937-1955)

Career Length (Days): 6481
Percentage of team's matches played: 85%
Career Average: 56.67
Adjusted career average: 55.34
Adjusted away average: 56.37
Adjusted top-opposition average: 63.29
Top Tier centuries: 4
Second tier centuries: 2
Third tier centuries: 8
Significant innings: 24
Significant innings per match: 0.30

Great innings: 6
5th Test: England v Australia at The Oval, Aug 20-24, 1938 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 16.15
5th Test: England v Australia at The Oval, Aug 14-18, 1948 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 12.57
4th Test: England v West Indies at The Oval, Aug 12-16, 1950 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 14.55
1st Test: Australia v England at Brisbane, Dec 1-5, 1950 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 16.41
4th Test: Australia v England at Adelaide, Feb 2-8, 1951 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 15.72
5th Test: West Indies v England at Kingston, Mar 30-Apr 3, 1954 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo 15.57


Innings worth average: 3.69

25 Test peak adjusted average: 76.58 (1949-1953)
50 Test peak adjusted average: 64.60 (1947-1954)


Quality Points: 651
Career Points: 105
Peak Points: 147
TOTAL POINTS: 903



Onto the top six greatest batsmen, and one of the opening batsmen in my alltime XI is Sir Leonard Hutton. Famous for being the first professional captain of England and for winning the Ashes on the 1954/55 tour of Australia, Hutton makes the top six for what he achieved when England were at one of their lowest ebbs after the war. He averaged a remarkable 76.58 over 25 tests and 64.60 over 50 tests, holding the England batting together when talent was in short supply. Above all, Hutton raised his game when playing against the best. Against top tier opposition, he averaged an adjusted 67.14. Overall, Hutton faced better bowling attacks than Sutcliffe and the great innings tally reads 6-0 in Hutton's favour. Those are the main reasons why Hutton is above Sutcliffe in this analysis. Sir Len would be one of the prime candidates to bat for anyone's life.

 

[smash84]

So the top 5 will have 3 West Indians....wow

 

[nightprowler10]

I've tried reading through the last few pages (no, really, I did) and while the WPM discussion obviously has some interest from some posters, let's please stop derailing this thread. If you would like to discuss it further please start a new thread. Any more essays like that show up here and imma go PC on y'all and start deleting posts, so you might as well put that effort in a new thread.

On a side note, its a joke to say that you don't want to derail the thread when you just wrote a 2 page essay derailing the thread.

 

[Howe_zat]

Hutton had 3 great innings in 6 months from 1950-51. Was in good nick then. If only he'd had the chance to bat at all between the ages of 23 and 29.

Is that the best top-opposition average?

 

[Crumbs]

Only joined recently and I just read the whole thread through, all 41 pages. What a thoroughly thought-provoking analysis... fascinating and edumacating in equal measure - rare combo! Just want to say thanks for the mindbending amount of work you must have put into this, DoG.

Eagerly anticipating the bowlers' version, although I may have to go away and wait for that thread to reach 50 pages so I can have another binge-in-one-sitting read. Installments would probably kill me.

Hobbs next??

 

[kyear2]

Brilliant batsman, and the only accumulator that I really admire because 1) He was an opener and would be a perfect foil and anchor for my aggressive middle order and 2) because he scored his runs in tough situations against some of the best, aggressive and varied attacks in history.
Additionally the fact that he broke Bradman's record vs O'Reilly with Bradman standing just feet away and the fact that the war interupted him at his absolute peak and the absolutely horrific and restricting injury he suffered during the war and how he overcame it all makes him a legitimate candidate for the title of greatest ever opener and also the best batsman period after Bradman.
Excellent captain too as he broke down barriers to become England's first professional captain. Wow.
Great work DoG.

 

[Furball]

The incredible thing about Hutton is that his career stats sell him short and don't do him justice.

 

[Captain_Cook]

I noticed that many members have Hobbs and Hutton as their All Time opening partnership. Since Hobbs and Sutcliffe had the greatest opening partnership in history, was Hutton that much better than Sutcliffe to break up such a legendary partnership?

Are the best individual batsman for the position preferable to those who have enough mutual understanding and complimentary skills?

 

[Prince EWS]

Are the best individual batsman for the position preferable to those who have enough mutual understanding and complimentary skills?

Yes, basically. It's a theoretical side; we could theoretically make them play 15 Tests a year together for 20 years. I'm sure Hobbs and Hutton would have just as good an understanding after that period.

I'm definitely not sold on the idea of picking someone just because he happened to play with someone else even in practical sides, but in theoretical sides it's definitely grossly unfair and needless in the process of picking the best players to form the best side on paper.

I should make it clear that I've got no problems with people actually picking Sutcliffe. You could make a good case for Sutcliffe being better than Hutton as I believe Coronis and maybe a couple of others have. "He was lucky enough to play with Hobbs" is a cop out though; when picking these teams the idea IMO is to remove the variables that exist due to circumstance and chance as best you can and examine how all the candidates performed in the situations they found themselves in and how much they proved in doing so.

 

[Viscount Tom]

Bradman's will be higher but that aside I think it could be.

 

[kyear2]

I noticed that many members have Hobbs and Hutton as their All Time opening partnership. Since Hobbs and Sutcliffe had the greatest opening partnership in history, was Hutton that much better than Sutcliffe to break up such a legendary partnership?

Are the best individual batsman for the position preferable to those who have enough mutual understanding and complimentary skills?

For me yes, but I also belive Hutton may have been better than Hobbs as well. Sutcliiffe for me just scored too damm slowly, a s/r in the hight 30's just doesn't cut it for me. Added to the fact that was a cear number two to Hobbs in the partnership and those who saw them play unanimously choose Hobbs as Sutcliffe superior while Hutton faced superior attacks and faced greater challenges. Pretty clear cut for me.

Additioanlly if we are picking by partnerships then why not pick Garner to open with Marshall, best opening new ball pair ever and Garner's stats on face value are comparable or better than those in competition for the slot opposite Maco's and they also complement each other well.

The way I se it pick the best players period.

 

[bagapath]

Hobbs, Hutton, Sobers, and Hammond maintained an avg close to 60 for almost till the last few innings of their careers. No wonder they are so high up in the rankings. Lara standing tall along with them (and Bradman) is the best thing for me.

 

[kyear2]

Hobbs, Hutton, Sobers, and Hammond maintained an avg close to 60 for almost till the last few innings of their careers. No wonder they are so high up in the rankings. Lara standing tall along with them (and Bradman) is the best thing for me.

Yea, really though Viv would have been higher that Lara though, but both were absolutely brilliant and peerless at their absolute best.

 

[smash84]

would have loved Viv to be in the top 5. Would be interesting to see if Lara came out ahead of Sobers in this exercise.

 

[fredfertang]

Quite surprised Hutton isn't higher - for he's always been the best batsman whose initials aren't DGB, save for a few years in the 80s when Graeme Fowler was at his peak, obviously