-
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.
Sydney Barnes vs Len Hutton
- Thread starter Johan
- Start date
capt_Luffy
International Coach
But but but but Barnes played with farmers and carpenters........
Johan
Cricketer Of The Year
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
People always say this but they don’t mention the doctors, lawyers and teachers.
Lucky 19th century bastards got to boost their stats by playing some random doctor for 40+ years
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
State Vice-Captain
Barnes. You put them any era and Barnes finishes higher. Other than the personality of Barnes which may have you considered.
Barnes is arguably the best bowler to ever walk the planet. Hutton isn’t the 2nd best batsman of all time. Not even arguably.
Barnes is arguably the best bowler to ever walk the planet. Hutton isn’t the 2nd best batsman of all time. Not even arguably.
DrWolverine
International Regular
Sydney Barnes is the greatest statistical outlier after Don Bradman
Who is the lawyer?
Thala_0710
State Captain
debraj72
Cricket Spectator
Once you remove South Africa(first test series ever for them)from his stats,it is 77 wickets from 15 matches@13,also he played excessively in Scg, whenever he played in Australia (like 4 out of 6 matches),also keep in mind how bowling friendly that era was even compared to 1910s,still an immortal,but probably not as good as barnes
DrWolverine
International Regular
For some reason I have always taken 20 Tests as the minimum sample size for any cricketer
Thala_0710
State Captain
Yeah I wouldn't say he was as good as Barnes, but just as much (if not more) of a statistical outlier as him.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Oh I’m sure there were some lawyers playing. cbf looking them up now. Its just that farmers/plumbers used in the negative context vs occupations viewwed as more positive. iirc Jardine was a lawyer, though he never practised.
South Africa of Lohmann’s time tbf completely pailed in comparison to later teams.
They had 4 series in the 19th century, all against England, all at home.
Batting averages vs bowling averages for them in these series
7.57 vs 23.04
9.00 vs 36.90 (1 match)
10.66 vs 28.95
14.05 vs 20.10
They lost all 8 matches unsurprisingly. I believe this is what some people picture when they think of Barnes’ series too.
Looking at only Aus vs Eng tests in the 19th century… we get these guys
Peel 101 @ 16.98
Turner 101 @ 16.53
Spofforth 94 @ 18.41
Lohmann 77 @ 13.01
Barnes (Billy, not Sydney) 51 @ 15.54
Bates 50 @ 16.42
Ferris 48 @ 14.25 (Ferris would later play a test for England against SA, taking 13/91)
Take from that what you will.
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Imo its convenient just cos it includes Headley and Pollock. However Voges kinda ruined that.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
On that note, we can also say he played with Kings
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Princes sure, Kings, I don’t think anyone who went on to become a King played even FC cricket.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
I am sure Ranji was later the King of Nawanagar
Coronis
Hall of Fame Member
Jam Shahed of Nawangar. You can’t be a real King of a province… especially when India was still under British rule and therefore the King of England.
capt_Luffy
International Coach
Fair..