The Greater Test Performance – Sydney Barnes in South Africa 1913/14 vs Donald Bradman in England 1930

[Johan]

Sydney Barnes in South Africa 1913/14: 49 wickets @ 10.94 with 7 5fers and 3 10fers in 4 matches and 8 innings, 27.67 Strike rate.

Donald Bradman in England 1930: 974 runs @ 139.14, with 4 hundreds, two double hundreds and one triple in 7 innings, 61.61 Strike rate.

probably the greatest bowling series of all time vs the greatest batting series of all time, which one wins?

 

[The Sean]

I couldn't work out where all the posts in the discussion had gone until I re-read the title and realised it's a different thread.

 

[Johan]

I'd say Barnes, by the barest of all margins.

 

[shortpitched713]

I'd say Barnes, by the barest of all margins.

Bradman by the smallest margin.

 

[shortpitched713]

Actually, what were the match results?

 

[Johan]

Actually, what were the match results?

England won the series 4-0 after losing last two serieses in South Africa

Australia regained the Ashes 2-1 after Hammond obliterated Australia to regain the Ashes for England in 1928-29

 

[shortpitched713]

England won the series 4-0 after losing last two serieses in South Africa

Australia regained the Ashes 2-1 after Hammond obliterated Australia to regain the Ashes for England in 1928-29

Hmm, I'll switch my answer then. The loss pretty much puts it out of the league of Barnes' feat then.

 

[Coronis]

Hmm, I'll switch my answer then. The loss pretty much puts it out of the league of Barnes' feat then.

It was Hobbs’ final good test match. Scored 74 and 78. Went on to score 149 across the final 7 innings of his career. England won by 93 runs. iirc he repeatedly offered to step aside during this series.

 

[shortpitched713]

It was Hobbs’ final good test match. Scored 74 and 78. Went on to score 149 across the final 7 innings of his career. England won by 93 runs. iirc he repeatedly offered to step aside during this series.

Yeah, I think just the fact that the Don was out-batted in one of the matches means his feat won't measure up.

Barnes was the leading wicket taker, and by far the best bowler in all 4 of the matches that he played, it wasn't even close that anyone was matching or exceeding him in a single game. He was just a machine of consistent bowling destruction in that series.

 

[Coronis]

Yeah, I think just the fact that the Don was out-batted in one of the matches means his feat won't measure up.

Barnes was the leading wicket taker, and by far the best bowler in all 4 of the matches that he played, it wasn't even close that anyone was matching or exceeding him in a single game. He was just a machine of consistent bowling destruction in that series.

I mean you say he was outbatted… he scored the only ton in the match (highest score by over 50 runs) and was the second highest scorer in the match, behind Hobbs

 

[shortpitched713]

I mean you say he was outbatted… he scored the only ton in the match (highest score by over 50 runs) and was the second highest scorer in the match, behind Hobbs

Bradman's team got a 2-1 result, albeit against a better opponent than the one against Barnes got a 4-0 result. Meanwhile, the only blemish against Barnes' for what would have been a "perfect" individual series for a bowler, is that he didn't play the last match. Which I guess isn't that surprising, knowing Barnes. Probably held out for more pay or some ****.

 

[Coronis]

Bradman's team got a 2-1 result, albeit against a better opponent than the one against Barnes got a 4-0 result. Meanwhile, the only blemish against Barnes' for what would have been a "perfect" individual series for a bowler, is that he didn't play the last match. Which I guess isn't that surprising, knowing Barnes. Probably held out for more pay or some ****.

Yes that was basically the reason iirc.