Ranking the Batsmen

[aussie tragic]

Ponting

 

[Fusion]

Miandad

 

[PhoenixFire]

Trumper

 

[silentstriker]

Anyone want to explain how they can vote for Trumper over Sutcliffe?

 

[silentstriker]

Ranji and Trumper played close to each other, and I would probably put Ranji > Trumper.

Sutcliffe, Ponting above both of them though.

 

[The Sean]

Anyone want to explain how they can vote for Trumper over Sutcliffe?

I'm the first to acknowledge that from a purely stats-based point of view, Trumper is something resembling Sutcliffe's biatch. I'm a real romantic when it comes to cricket history though, and whenever you read accounts of Trumper by the writers of the day or the men he played with and against you get the picture of someone who was touched by real magic. The kind of player who - like Lara and Tendulkar today - opposition players actually considered it to be a privilege to play against, even if they know they are going to be on the end of a battering.

Sydney Barnes was once quoted as saying that Trumper was the only batsman he ever bowled to that he truly rated, and George Hirst when once opening the bowling against Trumper and being asked by his captain where he wanted the field set, famously replied "It doesn't matter, Victor will do as he pleases."

Trumper wasn't remotely concerned with averages, and there are many stories of him making 100 then throwing his wicket away to give the other guys a bat, or to donate his wicket to a worthy bowler who had toiled all day without luck. He was also famous for his ability to make runs in "impossible" conditions, and there are many accounts of him giving a spectacular display of batsmanship on a sticky pitch where no other batsman could even lay bat on ball. It should also be remembered that he suffered from ill health for long before his tragic early death, and this often reduced his consistency at a statistical level.

Most of all though, Trumper was - like Miller or Akram - that most loveable of cricketers, the flawed genius. The kind of player who could do anything, own anyone, but didn't always feel like it, wasn't always interested, didn't do it just for the sake of it.

None of this is meant as a detriment to Sutcliffe - anyone with Sutcliffe's record is rightly entitled to a place among the greats, and if people rate him above Trumper then I've got no problem with that. He was just a different type of player, more reliable and consistent, but not as dynamic or dominant.

I guess it's all part of the joys of these debates, that it all comes down to opinions. Sutcliffe was a relentless accumulator, Trumper an entrancing genius. And the romantic in me always leans toward the genius.

 

[silentstriker]

I'm the first to acknowledge that from a purely stats-based point of view, Trumper is something resembling Sutcliffe's biatch. I'm a real romantic when it comes to cricket history though, and whenever you read accounts of Trumper by the writers of the day or the men he played with and against you get the picture of someone who was touched by real magic. The kind of player who - like Lara and Tendulkar today - opposition players actually considered it to be a privilege to play against, even if they know they are going to be on the end of a battering.

Sydney Barnes was once quoted as saying that Trumper was the only batsman he ever bowled to that he truly rated, and George Hirst when once opening the bowling against Trumper and being asked by his captain where he wanted the field set, famously replied "It doesn't matter, Victor will do as he pleases."

Trumper wasn't remotely concerned with averages, and there are many stories of him making 100 then throwing his wicket away to give the other guys a bat, or to donate his wicket to a worthy bowler who had toiled all day without luck. He was also famous for his ability to make runs in "impossible" conditions, and there are many accounts of him giving a spectacular display of batsmanship on a sticky pitch where no other batsman could even lay bat on ball. It should also be remembered that he suffered from ill health for long before his tragic early death, and this often reduced his consistency at a statistical level.

Most of all though, Trumper was - like Miller or Akram - that most loveable of cricketers, the flawed genius. The kind of player who could do anything, own anyone, but didn't always feel like it, wasn't always interested, didn't do it just for the sake of it.

None of this is meant as a detriment to Sutcliffe - anyone with Sutcliffe's record is rightly entitled to a place among the greats, and if people rate him above Trumper then I've got no problem with that. He was just a different type of player, more reliable and consistent, but not as dynamic or dominant.

I guess it's all part of the joys of these debates, that it all comes down to opinions. Sutcliffe was a relentless accumulator, Trumper an entrancing genius. And the romantic in me always leans toward the genius.

I am not claiming he was rubbish, I just have a bit hard time putting him above Sutcliffe.

 

[The Sean]

I am not claiming he was rubbish, I just have a bit hard time putting him above Sutcliffe.

Well I suppose then it's for everyone's benefit that you don't have to.

 

[silentstriker]

Well I suppose then it's for everyone's benefit that you don't have to.

Probably, but since it is acknowledged that my opinion is tantamount to fact, you can't either.

 

[The Sean]

Probably, but since it is acknowledged that my opinion is tantamount to fact, you can't either.

Touche!

I still will though, just because I'm that much of a rebel.

 

[Matt79]

I'm the first to acknowledge that from a purely stats-based point of view, Trumper is something resembling Sutcliffe's biatch. I'm a real romantic when it comes to cricket history though, and whenever you read accounts of Trumper by the writers of the day or the men he played with and against you get the picture of someone who was touched by real magic. The kind of player who - like Lara and Tendulkar today - opposition players actually considered it to be a privilege to play against, even if they know they are going to be on the end of a battering.

Sydney Barnes was once quoted as saying that Trumper was the only batsman he ever bowled to that he truly rated, and George Hirst when once opening the bowling against Trumper and being asked by his captain where he wanted the field set, famously replied "It doesn't matter, Victor will do as he pleases."

Trumper wasn't remotely concerned with averages, and there are many stories of him making 100 then throwing his wicket away to give the other guys a bat, or to donate his wicket to a worthy bowler who had toiled all day without luck. He was also famous for his ability to make runs in "impossible" conditions, and there are many accounts of him giving a spectacular display of batsmanship on a sticky pitch where no other batsman could even lay bat on ball. It should also be remembered that he suffered from ill health for long before his tragic early death, and this often reduced his consistency at a statistical level.

Most of all though, Trumper was - like Miller or Akram - that most loveable of cricketers, the flawed genius. The kind of player who could do anything, own anyone, but didn't always feel like it, wasn't always interested, didn't do it just for the sake of it.

None of this is meant as a detriment to Sutcliffe - anyone with Sutcliffe's record is rightly entitled to a place among the greats, and if people rate him above Trumper then I've got no problem with that. He was just a different type of player, more reliable and consistent, but not as dynamic or dominant.

I guess it's all part of the joys of these debates, that it all comes down to opinions. Sutcliffe was a relentless accumulator, Trumper an entrancing genius. And the romantic in me always leans toward the genius.

What he said.

Arthur Mailey grew up idolising Trumper and eventually got the chance to bowl to him as a teenager in one of his first games. He bowled what he felt at the time was the best leg-break he'd ever bowled, which Trumper smashed for four. Then he tried his wrong'un which got the great man's wicket. Mailey wrote, "I felt no triumph, but a sadness akin to having killed a dove".

 

[Mister Wright]

Border

 

[vic_orthdox]

Border

 

[Perm]

Sutcliffe

 

[adharcric]

UPDATE: Ponting 7, Trumper 4, Miandad 2, Sutcliffe 2, Border 2

Ponting with a fair lead but Trumper is in with a shout and I still haven't voted. Vote!

 

[C_C]

Border

 

[adharcric]

Punter fans finally get their wish.
Consider the following: H Sutcliffe, B Richards, J Miandad, R Dravid, V Trumper

The List
1. Don Bradman (AUS)
2. Garry Sobers (WI)
3. Jack Hobbs (ENG)
4. Sachin Tendulkar (IND)
5. Viv Richards (WI)
6. Brian Lara (WI)
7. Sunil Gavaskar (IND)
8. Wally Hammond (ENG)
9. Greg Chappell (AUS)
10. George Headley (WI)
11. Graeme Pollock (RSA)
12. Everton Weekes (WI)
13. Len Hutton (ENG)
14. Steve Waugh (AUS)
15. Clyde Walcott (WI)
16. Ricky Ponting (AUS)

The vote for the #17 batsman of all-time begins now.

The Contenders

 

[chaminda_00]

Whoever is the 2nd highest to Trumper, shouldn't make the top 50...

 

[adharcric]

Whoever is the 2nd highest to Trumper, shouldn't make the top 50...

 

[Johnners]

Sutcliffe