Len Hutton (Pre-World War) vs Len Hutton (Post-World War)

[Johan]

which version of Hutton was better?

Pre World-War: 1,345 runs @ 67.25 with 5 hundreds

Post World-War: 5,626 runs @ 54.62 with 14 hundreds

 

[DrWolverine]

Post war

 

[capt_Luffy]

I think more than stats, the version without a permanent physical distortion

 

[Coronis]

which version of Hutton was better?

Pre World-War: 1,345 runs @ 67.25 with 5 hundreds

Post World-War: 5,626 runs @ 54.62 with 14 hundreds

Its hard to tell. Physically obviously pre. He would have evolved as a batsman though and did face the toughest conditions of his career later on. And of course there is the relative sample size. Very hard to tell

 

[honestbharani]

So we have come down to this? Literally a Player (singular) Comparison.

 

[Coronis]

So we have come down to this? Literally a Player (singular) Comparison.

What a time to be alive.

 

[DrWolverine]

Len Hutton played just 13 tests pre war

 

[Cricket Bliss]

Pre-war Hutton has better stats that would benefit a team more than post war Hutton since he had to deal with some physical limitations.

 

[Johan]

Pre War Hutton could still play a high angled hook or pull shot and his one hand wasn't a numb, stiff mess for the rest of his life. Post War Hutton reinvented himself and had a new technique. It's like Anakin vs Vader.

 

[peterhrt]

Hutton himself said he was at his best in 1939. His post-war peak was considered to be 1949. He was dropped by England the year before.

His reputation grew during the 1950s and even more afterwards.