• 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.

Wisden's Cricketers of the Century

Revelation

U19 Debutant
Male Players - Australia

PLAYERS SORTED BY SURNAME:
A B C D E F G H I J K L M
N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Bill Ponsford

Full Name: William Harold Ponsford
Born: 19 October 1900, North Fitzroy, Melbourne, Victoria
Died: 6 April 1991, Kyneton, Victoria
Major Teams: Victoria, Australia.

Batting Style: Right Hand Bat
Bowling Style: Right Arm Medium

Test Debut: Australia v England at Sydney, 1st Test, 1924/25
Last Test: Australia v England at The Oval, 5th Test, 1934

Wisden Cricketer of the Year 1935
Australian Cricket Hall of Fame 1996
Career Statistics:

TESTS
(career)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 29 48 4 2122 266 48.22 7 6 21 0

O M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling - - - - - - - - - -

FIRST-CLASS
(career: 1920/21 - 1933/34)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 162 235 23 13819 437 65.18 47 43 71 0

Balls M R W Ave BBI 5 10 SR Econ
Bowling 38 0 41 0 - - 0 0 - 6.47

- Explanations of First-Class and List A status courtesy of the ACS.


StatsGuru Filters for Bill Ponsford

* Test Player


Statistics involving Bill Ponsford

* First-class: Australian partnership record
* Test: Australian partnership record


Articles about Bill Ponsford


Pictures of Bill Ponsford

* Bill Ponsford - Portrait

Profile:
Wisden obituary
Bill Ponsford, died at Kyneton, Victoria, on April 6, 1991; at 90, he was Australia’s oldest living Test cricketer and the sole survivor of HL Collins’s 1926 team in England. He made 162 in his second first-class game, for Victoria against Tasmania at Launceston in February 1922, but did not play for the state again until selected against the same opposition a year later in Melbourne. Then, in what was only his fourth innings, he created a sensation by hitting 429 in 477 minutes: it was the world’s highest first-class score until he bettered it five years later. Furthermore, Victoria’s 1059 was the first four-figure total in any first-class match, and Ponsford, who was captaining the side, stayed until he made the 1000th run himself, having gone in at 200 for three.

He was soon to prove that his 429 was something more than money for old rope against moderate bowling, as some would have it. The previous record-holder, AC MacLaren, had protested peevishly at the status of the match. Four centuries for Victoria in 1923-24, including 248 out of 456 with Edgar Mayne for the first wicket against Queensland – still an Australian record – sounded a warning note of what was in store for bowlers. The next season he played in all five Tests against England and scored 110 and 128 in the first two, an unprecedented achievement. His tour of England in 1926 was less successful, but early in December a veritable torrent of runs began to flow from his bat. Never before had anyone strung together such a series of colossal scores as Ponsford did in 1926-27 and 1927-28. In 1926-27, his innings were 214 and 54, 151, 352, 108 and 84, 12 and 116, 131 and 7, producing an aggregate of 1229 runs at 122.90; in 1927-28 he scored 133, 437, 202 and 38, 336, 6 and 2, and 63 – an aggregate of 1217 at 152.12. His 336 against South Australia in January 1928 was his eleventh first-class hundred in consecutive matches in Australia.

Only phenomenal powers of concentration, a high degree of physical fitness and an insatiable appetite for runs could have sustained him through so many hours at the crease. Over Christmas in 1926, Ponsford was in especially devastating form. On the second day of Victoria’s match against New South Wales at Melbourne, he dominated an opening partnership of 375 with Woodfull, and his 352, of which 334 were made in a day, contained 36 fours. It was the foundation of Victoria’s 1107, still the first-class total. But in reviewing 1927-28 the gods must have deemed Ponsford guilty of hubris, after he had the temerity to amass 1013 runs in only four innings. Nemesis was soon to follow: his new world-record score of 437, made in 621 minutes against Queensland at Melbourne, was eclipsed two years later by the young Bradman’s 452 not out.

Ponsford, who was born in the Melbourne suburb of North Fitzroy, showed an unusual aptitude for cricket from his earliest years, taking as his model Les Cody, the state player, whose strokeplay he greatly admired. Pennant cricket for the St Kilda club led on to his first-class debut for Victoria in 1920-21, against Douglas’s MCC side. A baseball batter’s strength of forearm and wrist enabled him to wield a very heavy bat, and if never exactly a stylist, Ponsford soon developed into a formidable allround batsman, with great strength on the on side. He was a fierce driver in front of the wicket and always worked hard to keep up the momentum of an innings; his two quadruple centuries each contained 42 fours. He was second to none as a player of spin bowling, and O’Reilly reckoned him to be an even tougher opponent than Bradman to bowl at. Against high pace he was less secure, and when facing left-armers like Voce and Quinn, the South African, he at times showed a tendency to move too far across his wicket.

The difference between Ponsford’s career and Test averages in 17 runs. In his first and last series, those of 1924-25 and 1934 against England, he made nearly half of his total of Test runs for an average of 64.81, whereas in his other six series he made his runs at under 40. This calls for an explanation. Although a member of the supporting cast in England in 1930, Ponsford played two fine innings – 81 at Lord’s and 110 at The Oval; and in 1930-31 he took heavy toll of the West Indies attack, just pipping Bradman in the averages. But in his other three series against England, the rhythm and progress of his Test career was disrupted by illness, injury and Bodyline. In 1926, his first tour of England was ruined by an attack of tonsillitis, which kept him out of action for the whole of June. He played in the last two Tests without success. Two years later, in 1928-29, a ball from Larwood broke a bone in his hand in the second Test, at Sydney, after the same bowler had dismissed him for 2 and 6 at Brisbane. In 1932-33 he never flinched when under fire, and staying in line he absorbed a lot of punishment in putting together a brave and skilful 85 at Adelaide in the third Test.

By the time he arrived in England on his third tour, in 1934, Ponsford was due for a change of fortune. Unbeaten double-hundreds at Cambridge and Lord’s suggested that the gods might be relenting at last, and when Ponsford and Bradman joined forces at Headingley in the fourth Test, putting on 388 for the fourth wicket, Ponsford’s play was seen to be not one whit inferior to Bradman’s. Neville Cardus, rhapsodising in characteristic fashion, saw the two champions as soloists in some grand double concerto. England were overwhelmed, but the damage done to them at The Oval was even worse. In a partnership surpassed in Tests only two months before Ponsford’s death, by AH Jones and MD Crowe, he and Bradman added 451 for the second wicket in a mere 316 minutes. Ponsford’s personal contributions in those two Tests were 181 and 266. He topped the Test averages with 569 runs at 94.83 and was one of Wisden’s Five Cricketers of the Year. Above all, he had shown the English public what he could do, whereupon he deemed it appropriate to retire from first-class cricket when still only 34.

Ponsford is the only player to have exceeded 400 twice. He and Hammond, apart from Bradman who made six, are the only players to have hit four triple-centuries, and his 281 not out against MCC at Lord’s in 1934 is the highest score by an Australian on the ground. He shared in five partnerships of 375 or more; with Woodfull, whose career record so closely matched his own, he put together 23 three-figure partnerships, eighteen of them for the first wicket and twelve over 150. In 162 first-class matches, he scored 13,819 runs at 65.18, an average only Bradman and Merchant have bettered among batsmen with more than 10,000 runs, and he hit 47 hundreds. In the Sheffield Shield his runs totalled 5413 at 83.27, and in 29 Tests he made 2122 runs for an average of 48.23. A superb outfielder in any position, he had 71 catches to his credit – although, when examined for war service, he was found to be red-green colour-blind. “Ponny” was a man of few words outside the dressing-room: shy, modest and shunning publicity at all costs. When he was postered in Sydney in 1928 after his extraordinary four-innings sequence, it must have given him nightmares; the flow of runs suddenly stopped. Few, however, have been more eloquent with the bat than the great Victorian.
 

Swervy

International Captain
Anil said:
are you serious? srinath, caddick, vaas better than kapil? exactly how do you prove that? you have probably never watched kapil at anything approaching his peak, that's why this comment....
8-)
well i watched Dev regularly in 1981,82 (test series),83 (world cup),85(that world champ of cricket tourny in Australia),86 in England, 87 in the world cup and 90 in england...so if his peak was before 81, or in 1984 and 1988 then yeah i did miss his peak
 

Ford_GTHO351

U19 Vice-Captain
Swervy said:
and with his drives, the ball would go all the way along the ground, to the boundary in a flash,and quite often it would look like he had just flicked his wrist.Scary to watch sometimes
Don't forget that Richards was also a strong person too which made it easier for him to just flick his wrist, yet his shot would be still be powerful enough to go to the boundary.
 

Ford_GTHO351

U19 Vice-Captain
Revelation said:
His career wasn't bad at all you know.

TESTS
(career)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 29 48 4 2122 266 48.22 7 6 21 0

FIRST-CLASS
(career: 1920/21 - 1933/34)
M I NO Runs HS Ave 100 50 Ct St
Batting & Fielding 162 235 23 13819 437 65.18 47 43 71 0
Yes its still a good career, but not great enough to warrant being one of the five cricketers of the century going on his Test record.

Like I said earlier, international performances IMO should determine firstly whether that cricketer is deserving of being one of the five.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Revelation said:
In 1926-27, his innings were 214 and 54, 151, 352, 108 and 84, 12 and 116, 131 and 7, producing an aggregate of 1229 runs at 122.90; in 1927-28 he scored 133, 437, 202 and 38, 336, 6 and 2, and 63 – an aggregate of 1217 at 152.12.
:jawdrop::jawdrop:
 

Revelation

U19 Debutant
''If I was picking my five cricketers of the century, I would of picked someone who firstly succeeded internationally & his FC record is much better than his Test record.''


It would seem to me that you should want to choose someone who did much better internationally as opposed to FC cricket, which is lower. By your criteria, Lara would not make your list since his Test average of 53.35 betters his FC average of 51.44. So someone who has scored 501* (WR), 400* (WR), 375 (WR), 277 as well as 213 and 153* in two of the greatest knowcks ever should not be named as one of the century's best? That. to me is amazing.
 

Anil

Hall of Fame Member
Swervy said:
well i watched Dev regularly in 1981,82 (test series),83 (world cup),85(that world champ of cricket tourny in Australia),86 in England, 87 in the world cup and 90 in england...so if his peak was before 81, or in 1984 and 1988 then yeah i did miss his peak
and you still seriously believe what you posted earlier? 8-)

he was one of the greatest all-rounders ever to play the game.

he was the best indian pace bowler ever. by a country mile(srinath comes a distant second....).

he was one of the most destructive lower-order batsman of his era.

he was one of the most consistently performing new-ball bowler of his age.

he was a brilliant fielder to boot, especially in the outfield.

his bowling and his average tapered off towards the last maybe year and a half of his career where you got the feeling that he was in the team just so he could reach hadlee's world record, but that low period still doesn't overshadow what had been by far a glittering career as a bowler and an all-rounder. he was the stock bowler as well as the strike bowler for most of the 80s for india and he shouldered the burden magnificiently.....vaas, caddick or srinath hasn't achieved 1/10th of what kapil has, just as a bowler, forget his all-round skills, how in the world can you call them better? 8-)
 

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Kumble's SR is significantly higher than all bar Gibbs & Kumble.

Other bowlers with lower SRs (excluding Stat Muppets):
CJ McDermott (297w)
J Garner (259)
JB Statham (252)
MA Holding (249)
AR Caddick (234)
D Gough (229)
RR Lindwall (228)
MG Hughes (212)
CL Cairns (206)
AME Roberts (202)
JA Snow (202)
HH Streak (202)
JR Thomson (200)
JN Gillespie (199)
JC Laker (193)
WW Hall (192)
AK Davidson (186)
GF Lawson (180)
ARC Fraser (177)
TM Alderman (170)
M Ntini (163)
IR Bishop (161)
DK Morrison (160)
SCG MacGill (152)
Harbhajan Singh (151)
CM Old (143)
B Lee (139)
GR Dilley (138)
DG Cork (131)
Shoaib Akhtar (125)
CEH Croft (125)
RM Hogg (123)
PM Pollock (116)
BA Reid (113)
BR Taylor (111)
PR Reiffell (104)
NAT Adcock (104)
SB Doull (98)
CC Griffith (94)
BP Patterson (93)
MJ Hoggard (92)
KCG Benjamin (92)
PS de Villiers (85)
GOB Allen (81)
H Larwood (78)
FH Tyson (76)
DW Fleming (75)
JK Lever (73)
Danish Kaneria (72)
CR Miller (69)
SJ Harmison (64)
LS Pascoe (64)
DR Tuffey (63)
WKM Benjamin (61)
DW Headley (60)
KD Boyce (60)
ALF de Mel (59)
AJ Bichel (58)
R Gilchrist (57)
Khan Mohammad (54)
FA Rose (53)
CS Martin (52)
GJ Gilmour (51)
AM Blignaut (51)
M Hayward (50)

Q: 50 wickets

Can't for the life of me understand why I did that, but I like statistical completeness :)
 

Ford_GTHO351

U19 Vice-Captain
Revelation said:
''If I was picking my five cricketers of the century, I would of picked someone who firstly succeeded internationally & his FC record is much better than his Test record.''


It would seem to me that you should want to choose someone who did much better internationally as opposed to FC cricket, which is lower. By your criteria, Lara would not make your list since his Test average of 53.35 betters his FC average of 51.44. So someone who has scored 501* (WR), 400* (WR), 375 (WR), 277 as well as 213 and 153* in two of the greatest knowcks ever should not be named as one of the century's best? That. to me is amazing.
International performances carry more weight IMO, since you are playing for your country against the best.

Now Lara's FC record includes county cricket which you cannot say is stronger than international cricket. By the way I'm not rubbishing Lara's FC record of 501* because that was a great performance, for somebody to bat and accumulate that many runs in a innings is a special performance.

Though you have to also remember that the five cricketers of the century was indeed based on performnaces in the 20th century. I pointed out this earlier, I got some stats of Lara's record (Test & ODI's) between 1996-2000 and whilst his ODI record was fairly ok, his Test record was nowhere near his high standards in that period.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Neil Pickup said:
Kumble's SR is significantly higher than all bar Gibbs & Kumble.

Other bowlers with lower SRs (excluding Stat Muppets):
CJ McDermott (297w)
J Garner (259)
JB Statham (252)
MA Holding (249)
AR Caddick (234)
D Gough (229)
RR Lindwall (228)
MG Hughes (212)
CL Cairns (206)
AME Roberts (202)
JA Snow (202)
HH Streak (202)
JR Thomson (200)
JN Gillespie (199)
JC Laker (193)
WW Hall (192)
AK Davidson (186)
GF Lawson (180)
ARC Fraser (177)
TM Alderman (170)
M Ntini (163)
IR Bishop (161)
DK Morrison (160)
SCG MacGill (152)
Harbhajan Singh (151)
CM Old (143)
B Lee (139)
GR Dilley (138)
DG Cork (131)
Shoaib Akhtar (125)
CEH Croft (125)
RM Hogg (123)
PM Pollock (116)
BA Reid (113)
BR Taylor (111)
PR Reiffell (104)
NAT Adcock (104)
SB Doull (98)
CC Griffith (94)
BP Patterson (93)
MJ Hoggard (92)
KCG Benjamin (92)
PS de Villiers (85)
GOB Allen (81)
H Larwood (78)
FH Tyson (76)
DW Fleming (75)
JK Lever (73)
Danish Kaneria (72)
CR Miller (69)
SJ Harmison (64)
LS Pascoe (64)
DR Tuffey (63)
WKM Benjamin (61)
DW Headley (60)
KD Boyce (60)
ALF de Mel (59)
AJ Bichel (58)
R Gilchrist (57)
Khan Mohammad (54)
FA Rose (53)
CS Martin (52)
GJ Gilmour (51)
AM Blignaut (51)
M Hayward (50)

Q: 50 wickets

Can't for the life of me understand why I did that, but I like statistical completeness :)
You missed Sydney Barnes. His strike-rate is much better than that of Kumble.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
a massive zebra said:
Yes they are very ordinary. Cam White (69 wickets at 34.01) and Beau Casson (35 wickets at 38.31) are the sort of average players that come about naturally without the influence of a great.
Actually, bearing in mind they're young and learnig their craft in the hardest domestic league there is, those figures aren't as bad as is made out.

Be interesting to see a comparative with Warne after that many FC games.
 

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
a massive zebra said:
What are stat muppets?
See The League for the Ages forum.

Stat Muppet noun
A player (especially a bowler) whose career averages are misrepresentative of his true ability due to his having played against either very poor oppositon, or on very poor pitches, or both. Examples - SF Barnes, GA Lohman, JJ Ferris, W Bates, W Barnes...

Term derived from a certain unsporting individual (Halsey) packing their team full of them because he couldn't win fair and square.
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Revelation said:
By your criteria, Lara would not make your list since his Test average of 53.35 betters his FC average of 51.44. So someone who has scored 501* (WR), 400* (WR), 375 (WR), 277 as well as 213 and 153* in two of the greatest knowcks ever should not be named as one of the century's best? That. to me is amazing.

Most of that is irrelevant as it's after 2000.
 

Top