How good was W.G. Grace?

[marc71178]

Yes, thats him, and yes he did declare on a score so he had made every score between 1 and 100 or was it 1 and 200?

He "only" got 124 tons, so I'm guessing it's the former.

 

[Smudge]

He "only" got 124 tons, so I'm guessing it's the former.

Technically he could score 101 tons and get every score between 1 and 200...

 

[archie mac]

He "only" got 124 tons, so I'm guessing it's the former.

Well as far as I am concerned it is 126 tons, and it may have been all cricket, but I think you may well be right

 

[archie mac]

Yeah I admit I haven't read a lot on Grace, but based on stats alone his performances in tests isn't spectacular.

22 games, 2 hundreds, average of 32. I guess those figures don't mean much in today's world though.

He did play a lot of games, and scored 54,000+ FC runs in 800+ games. But compare that to Graeme Hick, 39,000+ FC runs in 496 games, averaging over 50.

CricInfo mention that he was paid £1,500 (£100,000 +) in todays money for a tour of Australia in 1873/74, so in his day I agree he must have been a Tendulkar like god.

The difference was (re-Tendulkar) he was the undisputed king.

A couple of very good books to read on the GOM are WG Grace A Life by Simon Rae/ WG by Robert Low or a very short one which gives you an idea of the legend is W.G.'s Birthday Party by Kynaston

 

[steds]

The top ten for Woodcock (1998)

Grace
Bradman
Sobers
Mynn
Hobbs
SF Barnes
Hammond
Viv Richards
Botham
Compton

Pardon my ignorance, but who?

 

[Slats4ever]

They were. He made cricket with his popularity. People came to watch Grace.

Also cricket was very professional in his day and he had numerous run-ins with bowlers. Certain Pro fast bowlers worked hard on doing as much damage to the body and reputation of the good Doctor as they could.

I think you are being very naive and disrespectful to his ability to say his performances were down to his reputation rather than talent.

I suggest you read a couple of good books on the topic.

what good books have you read on the topic

 

[stumpski]

Pardon my ignorance, but who?

Kent all-rounder of the 1840s and 50s. Impossible to compare players from that era with the likes of Bradman and Sobers IMO.

 

[JBH001]

Loads of great stories about Grace, whether myth of fact. Like nipping off to Crystal Palace during a game to win a 100 yards sprint at an athletics meet. Another great one is he apparently kidnapped a member of the Aussie touring party and refused to let him go until he agreed to play for Gloucs that summer.

The Crystal Palace story is spot on.
If I recall correctly it was a 110 yard sprint which he won soon after having bashed a century - or it may have been a double hundred. It may have been during his golden run in 1871?
[EDIT - I have time on my hands this afternoon!] It was a 440 yard hurdles, national and olympian association meeting, he won 2 days after having smacked 224 against Surrey while playing for England.
Apparently his athleticism and endurance were beyond comparison - especially in his early days.

In terms of his cricketing ability we should keep in mind that by the time tests came around W G Grace was on the decline (except for that golden year of 1895), and in any case the FC cricket structure in England was of a high enough standard - especially in the pre-test days - to serve as a basis for comparison. In this respect as others have said he is streaks ahead in terms of comparison to other batsmen of the time. This is even more so when we take the pitches into account. Uncovered and woefully underprepared, especially in the 1970s which was really Grace's halycon decade. If I remember some accounts right it was not unusual to received 3 shooters in one over and then to have the next delivery sailing over your head.!

There is one more thing. A comment made by Ranji from the Jubilee Book of Cricket that I recall reading years ago in the Wisden Anniversary Edition (I think that was the name, a big yellow book detailing the beginning and history of cricket upto 1988 by Vic Marks and Bill Frindall, I think) where he calls Grace the maker of modern batting.

I shall paraphrase here - but apparently before Grace came into his own batsmen were of 2 kinds and solely of 2 kinds. They either played forward or back - hitting a full toss was wrong and smashing a long hop was considered "immoral". Grace changed all this by unifying the elements of batting, playing forward and back, smashing all balls that deserved the treatment etc. Ranji goes on to say that Grace made batting as we now know it to be - that he "turned the old one stringed instrument into a many chorded lyre"

[EDIT] Found the Quote. Ranji from the Jubilee Book of Cricket on W G Grace.

"He revolutionised cricket, turning it from an accomplishment into a science; he united in his masterly self all the good points of all the good players and made utility the criterion of style... He turned the old one-stringed instrument into a many chorded lyre, a wand. But in addition he made his execution equal his invention. Possibly Grace's most far reaching achievement was to master both forward and back play and draw on both with equal dexterity. Until his time, a man was either a back player like Carpenter or a forward player like Pilch, a hitter like E.H. Budd or a sticker like Harry Jupp. But W.G. Grace was each and all at once."

Btw, the score at which W G declared was 93. The only score he had not made between 0 - 100.

 

[wpdavid]

(Mynn) Kent all-rounder of the 1840s and 50s. Impossible to compare players from that era with the likes of Bradman and Sobers IMO.

Quite. Sounds like Woodcock was trying to show off.

 

[FRAZ]

"He revolutionised cricket,

Exactly !!! Trust me such people are way better than the others. The colourful person . He made the game famous TBH . And I guess that he may be was more famous in his times than Don Bradman was in the post WW2 times , or as Shoaib Akhtar is now .
And lol I didn't know that there was a computer game dedicated to him
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport3/cwc2003/spl/game/html/initial.stm

 

[Sanz]

Pardon my ignorance, but how did Shoaib Akhtar 'revolutionized Cricket' ?

 

[Jono]

He brought the "put your arms like a plane" wicket celebration on the map. So much so that Nehra tried imitating it. Problem is he didn't get to do it too often.

 

[greg]

I'm not really sure if it's accurate to say that Bradman "revolutionised cricket" either, is it?

Except in the way that he indirectly created bodyline with all that followed from it.

 

[JBH001]

He brought the "put your arms like a plane" wicket celebration on the map. So much so that Nehra tried imitating it. Problem is he didn't get to do it too often.

Didn't Donald and Wasim do that before Akhtar?

 

[Jono]

But Shoaib had the hair to go with it

 

[FRAZ]

Shoaib Akhtar
A good and an honest cricketer . Bowls with heart . Targets and gets wickets . I only remember 5-6 matches where he could not perform properly otherwise a great bowler . Won the test series against England single handedly . Only person with perfect yorker after Waqar Younis . His bouncer has been quite an effective weapon and his slower delivery is quite lethal and he is famous and he attracts the crowd .

 

[Swervy]

Shoaib Akhtar
A good and an honest cricketer . Bowls with heart . Targets and gets wickets . I only remember 5-6 matches where he could not perform properly otherwise a great bowler . Won the test series against England single handedly . Only person with perfect yorker after Waqar Younis . His bouncer has been quite an effective weapon and his slower delivery is quite lethal and he is famous and he attracts the crowd .

I dont think the emergence of a 'good and honest' player constitutes a revolution within the game though

 

[benchmark00]

I dont think the emergence of a 'good and honest' player constitutes a revolution within the game though

But oi, he's got heart.

 

[FRAZ]

I dont think the emergence of a 'good and honest' player constitutes a revolution within the game though

Yes he did revolutionised the cricket by his attitude . He was in the Tv Advertisements and he was visiting the childern's hospitals and he is always considered as a high ranking cricket guest .
Yes his Bowling is a revolution in its self ./ The first true fast bowlers and followed by him there came Brett Lee (Whom I believe does not chuk ) . And then came Bond ,Shane Bond . He re lived the dangerous bowling in the presence of one master spinner and one who is a master even without the drugs . He made his bowling difficult even on the flat pitches .
His way of threatening the batsman is unique in the current world . I was reading a newspaper that Shoaib will be playing for a village team and so many people are expected to come just to see him . The way the viewers shout along with his run up is great . The way he fakes is accent is a revolution in its own mean . The way he has his media relationship uis a different story . He is I think the most hated person in some parts of the world which is may be a revolution in itself . If XXX can form an evolution then cant we just label Shoaib with revolution .

 

[Lillian Thomson]

To get back to the original question, WG Grace is the greatest batsman I ever saw (with the possible exception of Viv Richards) and his bowling was naggingly accurate. At his peak - bearing in mind that he didn't play Test Cricket until his early 30's - he was very agile in the field for such a big man. I was at the infamous game when he refused to walk because the crowd had come to see him. It was charity match and the takings would have been hit hard if he had been out early as the crowd was still gathering. This story has been blown up and insanely exaggerated, it happened only once, it was a charity game which the captains agreed to restart with the dismissal and the few balls that preceded it wiped from the records.