Trumper vs Hill

[Coronis]

Australia’s two great pre-WW1 batsmen.

General opinion would greatly favour Trumper, though I believe he is a bit mythologized.

Of course we all know of his famous feats. The 2570 runs in England in 1902, one of the wettest summers ever. The hundred before lunch at Old Trafford. The famous posed photo.

Fun fact: Trumper never topped the runs or averages on an Ashes tour, and Hill beat him every time.

Anyway, some stats to compare.

Trumper: 48 matches, 89 innings, 3163 runs @ 39.04, 8 tons, 13 fifties
Home: 49 innings, 2061 runs @ 45.80, 6 tons
Away: 40 innings, 1102 runs @ 30.61, 2 tons

Hill: 49 matches, 89 innings, 3412 runs @ 39.21, 7 tons, 19 fifties
Home: 56 innings, 2308 runs @ 41.21, 4 tons
Away: 33 innings, 1104 runs @ 35.61, 3 tons

Another fun fact: 6 of Hill’s fifties were between 90-99 (1 not out), vs Trumper’s 0.

Both were aggressive players, Trumper (SR 67) and Hill (SR 59) - think Jayasuriya and Graeme Smith.

Seems to me like Trumper was more capable of playing a spectacular innings whereas Hill was the more consistent of the two.

I definitely think the gap between them is far closer than the consensus. For example when the forum voted on the top 50 batsmen of all time last year, Trumper was 31st and Hill 49th.

What do you guys think? (I veeeeery slightly lean towards Hill)

 

[Chrish]

Wasn’t it Hill himself who said that Trumper was far superior batsman ?

 

[AndyZaltzHair]

Hill is underrated. He was not as flamboyant as Trumper but very much equally effective. Also he had many scores in the nineties. Maybe due to Trumper’s unique playing style and more memorable innings separated Trumper more than his other mates and thus he got more attention and focus from media and fans. But Hill went about business just equally quietly. I honestly can’t separate between the two.

 

[peterhrt]

Impression is that in Australia they were judged to be close.

English writers placed Trumper way ahead, due mainly to his ability on rain-damaged pitches, which was actually probably superior to any of the English batsmen who had much more experience of them. Few realised that Trumper practised regularly in dangerous water-soaked nets, which teammates including Hill were careful to avoid. Noble was rated the next best Australian batsman on wet wickets, adopting a far more cautious, English, approach.

Hill was a brilliant hard-wicket player, perhaps the better of the two on these surfaces.

English critics tended to be more impressed with style, where Trumper was comfortably ahead. Hill had rather an ugly stance with a low grip, and strongly favoured the leg side.

Barnes said he found Hill harder to dismiss, and the left-hander was the more consistent overall. This had something to do with Trumper's health, which was never robust and sometimes decidedly flaky. Illness rarely persuaded him to rein in his attacking instincts, which affected his numbers.

 

[shortpitched713]

Going Hill, just due to the better Ashes tours performances, which were the harder opponent at the time so average is less inflated than Trumper's. Very similar looking careers, on the surface of it, though.

 

[BazBall21]

In below-average RPW tests

Hill 33.05
Trumper 32.65

 

[Coronis]

ftr also, in matches they played together

Hill 2930 @ 40.13 6 tons 16 fifties
Trumper 2862 @ 41.47 8 tons 11 fifties

Home:
Hill 1856 @ 38.66 3 tons 11 fifties
Trumper 2061 @ 45.80 6 tons 8 fifties

Away:
Hill 1074 @ 42.96 3 tons 6 fifties
Trumper 801 @ 33.37 2 tons 3 fifties

 

[shortpitched713]

ftr also, in matches they played together

Hill 2930 @ 40.13 6 tons 16 fifties
Trumper 2862 @ 41.47 8 tons 11 fifties

Home:
Hill 1856 @ 38.66 3 tons 11 fifties
Trumper 2061 @ 45.80 6 tons 8 fifties

Away:
Hill 1074 @ 42.96 3 tons 6 fifties
Trumper 801 @ 33.37 2 tons 3 fifties

Should be a sweep for Hill, by CW standards then, shouldn't it?

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Not sure, probably Trumper