PlayerComparisons
International Regular
Englands batting might be a bit better
Hobb > Smith
Sutcliffe = Barry
Hutton > Pollock
Hammond > Kallis
Barrington > Nourse
Root = De Villiers
But SAs fast bowling is much better
-
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.
Joe Root vs Mark Waugh
- Thread starter PlayerComparisons
- Start date
Hobb > Smith
Sutcliffe = Barry
Hutton > Pollock
Hammond > Kallis
Barrington > Nourse
Root = De Villiers
But SAs fast bowling is much better
capt_Luffy
International Captain
Barnes = Steyn
Trueman = Donald
Botham < Procter
Laker > Tayfield
It's better, but not by much really. Also, you could as well say, Grace > Barry or Hobbs > Barry, Sutcliffe > Smith.
BazBall21
International Vice-Captain
South Africa's pace depth and batting depth on virtue of their influx of all rounders are their big advantage points. Both have world class batting lineups. Even if England's is slightly better, think South Africa's edge in the bowling will be more decisive.
On a flatter wicket, think SA can coast home.
Disagree.
Coronis
International Coach
I’m curious as to why?
capt_Luffy
International Captain
I personally rate Barrington higher, but Nourse>Barrington isn't really out of the left field.
Coronis
International Coach
All I did was ask why, not lose my mind and call it ridiculous lol
Nourse was highly unlucky to play as few Tests as he did, with the combination of playing for a team that played relatively few series' and WW2. He played brilliantly in a losing cause in his series against rampaging O'Reilly and Grimmett, being pretty much a lone bulwark in that series and after struggling in his first 2-3 Tests against Verity went on to play him very well thereafter too. This makes me rate him very highly against spin.
Post war and nearing forty years of age he made a pretty decent fist of things against the Aussie pace attack of Lindwall, Miller and Johnston too which suggests to me that his ability to play pace was quite high too. It's a pretty good body of work he managed to get in considering his relative lack of opportunity to do so.
Barrington on the other hand has two admittedly good series' against peak Davo but, other than that was mostly bullying weak attacks, with his record against the West Indies, the best attack for the majority of his peak, not standing up too well.
Post war and nearing forty years of age he made a pretty decent fist of things against the Aussie pace attack of Lindwall, Miller and Johnston too which suggests to me that his ability to play pace was quite high too. It's a pretty good body of work he managed to get in considering his relative lack of opportunity to do so.
Barrington on the other hand has two admittedly good series' against peak Davo but, other than that was mostly bullying weak attacks, with his record against the West Indies, the best attack for the majority of his peak, not standing up too well.
kyear2
International Coach
I think we're looking at who was greater, and that's fine.
And there's a reason why even we, nor did cricinfo nor do most experts go all that way back into that 19th century. As Red said, it really was a different game that didn't start to resemble ours until the 1930's or so and fully transition completion wise until post WW2.
The rules were different, the techniques were archaic, the completion limited and basically between and in two countries. We don't know what techniques Grace had, we've heard the stories of him being dismissed and refusing to walk because the crowds were there to see him. As much as we speculate what Barnes bowled and at what speeds, it's basically just that, speculation.
It was the developmental stage of the game and it's important for historical and nostalgic purposes, but let's not pretend they would be competitive. So if anyone says that they would trust Grace vs a South African attack more than Barry ****ing Richards, then it's purely for the purpose of being contrarian.
And for @capt_Luffy I do admire Hutton, but for even in those post war times for him to be accused of not imposing himself on attacks, I don't see him being better in the middle order than a Pollock.
And with regards to giving Bradman a pass and not Hammond, I don't for a min believe (and have consistently said) he would have averaged 100 playing in the '80's or 90's. Hammond struggled vs Constantine and Martindale, were aren't talking A list talent, good players yes, not guys knocking down the all time greats list.
I was previously asked who do I have Hobbs rated 4th but my openers would be Hutton and Gavaskar, and precisely for this reason.
Plus with a batting lineup of
Sutcliffe, Hobbs, Hutton, Barrington and Hammond were obviously playing draw cricket. Root and more is required in such a lineup, and not to add, that against such a proposed bowling lineup, you're bound a catch a good one eventually, especially if you're letting the bowlers settle into their work.
capt_Luffy
International Captain
Okay, let's be done with 'it's cricket or not' debates and I would suggest that every batsman gets a year of time to adjust themselves to the modern game. Let me be clear, it has always been "greater batsman expected to do better" simply because that's the only way we know to rate them. Cricket has changed significantly in the last 5 decades, and we really don't know how Barry and Graeme would perform on being teleported to the modern day. That just doesn't work. For any sport, on making a team of football we include Pele in it knowing full well he just won't work like that in the modern game. Heck, even the Great Don, we don't know how will he do in the modern sport. That, imo, is no reason to rate Barry Richards of all people over him to play high pace. In his 4 Tests the best bowler he played was an old McKenzie, and we can hardly draw anything really conclusive from 5 matches in WSC, atleast enough to not be a Graeme Hicke. Can he Pollock handle Laker in a slow English turner? They definitely haven't done anything close. Same for Kallis, Smith and AB vs Barnes. I understand your point, but it's really not practical. We kinda have to rate like assuming the greater player will just adapt themselves to the modern game with sufficient time more than anyone worse. Playing style is though a different issue.
E v SA 1965 Second Test on a Trent Bridge greentop. 125 from 145 balls out of 269 total v Tom Cartwright (pitch tailor made for him) and Snow. Effectively won the series.
capt_Luffy
International Captain
Wasn't Tom Cartwright a medium pacer though?? I wasn't doubting Graeme Pollock's abilities, just that he really never played against many ATG spinners, especially off spinners, in rank turners.
Yes he was, but the local conditions were difficult and unfamiliar to Pollock. Along with Les Jackson and Derek Shackleton, Cartwright was the best bowler of the 1950s and 1960s on such a surface.
HouHsiaoHsien
International Debutant
JB Hobbs says hi. So does Hutton
PlayerComparisons
International Regular
And Hammond, Sutcliffe, Barrington, and maybe Compton, May and Boycott would be ahead of him
HouHsiaoHsien
International Debutant
He’s done more than Boycott atleast
capt_Luffy
International Captain
I would probably rank the Top 51 English batsmen as:
1. W G Grace
2. Jack Hobbs
3. Len Hutton
4. Wally Hammond
5. Herbert Sutcliffe
6. Ken Barrington
7. Joe Root
8. K S Ranjitsinhji
9. Denis Compton
10. Geoff Boycott
11. Peter May
12. Arthur Shrewsbury
13. Kevin Pietersen
14. Colin Cowdrey
15. Alaistar Cook
16. Graham Gooch
17. David Gower
18. Frank Woolley
19. Ted Dexter
20. Tom Graveney
21. Stanley Jackson
22. Maurice Leyland
23. Patsy Hendren
24. Johnny Tyldesly
25. Graham Thorpe
26. Denis Amiss
27. Archie Maclaren
28. Plum Warner
29. C B Fry
30. Tom Hayward
31. Douglas Jardine
32. John Edrich
33. Cyril Washbrook
34. Phil Mead
35. Eddie Paynter
36. Robin Smith
37. Bobby Abel
38. Alec Stewart
39. Mike Atherton
40. Allan Steel
41. Ian Bell
42. Jonathan Trott
43. Joe Hardstaff Jr
44. Andy Sandham
45. K S Duleepsinhji
46. Michael Vaughan
47. Ben Stokes
48. Basil D'Oliveira
49. Jack Russell Sr
50. Ernest Tyldesly
51. Bill Edrich
BazBall21
International Vice-Captain
I'll have a go at this later
Definitely some placings I would change here, and might have a go later, but what a magnificent undertaking a top 51 is.