Peter May vs Kane Williamson

[capt_Luffy]

Larwood had one great series. Outside of that he was extremely inconsistent, and more often than not, very poor at test level. For example, in the previous Ashes in Australia, he played all 5 matches, taking 18 wickets @ 40. However he took 8/62 in one match, leaving him with his other 10 wickets costing him 66. Reminiscient of Starc’s recent performance in the B/G series. Outside of his one series, he wouldn’t really fire for more than one match in a series.

Larwood was cut off from Test cricket. Unlike Tyson who was 50s English Bond. His best series was better than Tyson (and certainly more legendary) and Tyson's other tours were largely against weak attacks. Also was handy in the tail.

PS: on that tour, the only match Australia didn't score 650 across the innings, but less than 200. And it wasn't like England score any less, afterall they won by 675. Tyson on his other Aussie tour got 3 in 2 matches for 66

 

[Coronis]

Larwood was cut off from Test cricket. Unlike Tyson who was 50s English Bond. His best series was better than Tyson (and certainly more legendary) and Tyson's other tours were largely against weak attacks. Also was handy in the tail.

PS: on that tour, the only match Australia didn't score 650 across the innings, but less than 200. And it wasn't like England score any less, afterall they won by 675. Tyson on his other Aussie tour got 3 in 2 matches for 66

I know that, and I think it was extremely unfair for a lot of the blame to befall Larwood. I however, am just going on what was shown. He had an excellent peak series, but apart from that triumph struggled to string any successful games together.

 

[capt_Luffy]

I know that, and I think it was extremely unfair for a lot of the blame to befall Larwood. I however, am just going on what was shown. He had an excellent peak series, but apart from that triumph struggled to string any successful games together.

And I am saying except that Aussie tour Tyson's success was against one minnow (like proper minnow with a single Test standard batsman) and a weak batting unit over 2 matches. Outside of their legacy Ashes, Larwood's Australia work is easily better than Tyson.

 

[Coronis]

And I am saying except that Aussie tour Tyson's success was against one minnow (like proper minnow with a single Test standard batsman) and a weak batting unit over 2 matches. Outside of their legacy Ashes, Larwood's Australia work is easily better than Tyson.

And that’s your opinion. To try and imply that comparing Tyson and Larwood is crazy though, is just being deliberately obtuse.

 

[capt_Luffy]

And that’s your opinion. To try and imply that comparing Tyson and Larwood is crazy though, is just being deliberately obtuse.

I never said it's crazy. I said comparing them, to me is like comparing Bond and Cowie or O'Reilly and Appleyard. One has a much better reason for playing so few Tests than the other, I just inherently don't like glass cannons.

 

[Coronis]

I never said it's crazy. I said comparing them, to me is like comparing Bond and Cowie or O'Reilly and Appleyard. One has a much better reason for playing so few Tests than the other, I just inherently don't like glass cannons.

I mean even before that - Larwood was only selected for 21/49 possible tests from his debut. If he had been capable of maintaining better form throughout series and become more of a fixture in the side perhaps he wouldn’t have ended up completely blackballed. Who knows

 

[capt_Luffy]

I mean even before that - Larwood was only selected for 21/49 possible tests from his debut. If he had been capable of maintaining better form throughout series and become more of a fixture in the side perhaps he wouldn’t have ended up completely blackballed. Who knows

A kinda bad argument NGL. He was benched after what was the best series by anyone since Barnes.