Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323
Tate and Larwood were totally different bowlers however. In all likelihood, the similarities end in saying they were both Englishmen who bowled seam up.
I'm a fan of Tate (especially having read Ray Robinson's fantastic account of him in Between Wickets), and I would argue he is an ATG bowler in his own right. But he was employed to bowl a lot of overs, off a shorter run and at far less pace than Larwood. Geary, according to a quick wikipedia search, was also in the workhorse mould - he wasn't an out-and-out quick being called upon regularly exceed his normal workload.
|
Yes, I agree. It was my point exactly. Larwood was in the same side as two seamers in the 'workhorse mould' which in turn limited his workload. He also had Wilfred Rhodes there who could bowl all day. My point was you gravely exaggerated the workload Larwood had during that series in particular.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323
In terms of 'what ifs' and 'potential', does that not rule out Barry Richards and Mike Procter from calculations? They both had one good series and dominated domestic cricket and have their names thrown up into ATG contention.
|
I'm not ruling Larwood out by any means. I consider him an ATG (however loose the term may be). I also consider Richards and Proctor in such a class. However, there's a tremendous difference between that level, and the level of being the greatest bowler ever. That's what I was getting at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rvd619323
Just as a statistical aside (because I hate stats picking and whatnot), if you remove his returns from the two games he played ill, his average drops to 25.67 - ahead of the Allen's and Voce's, and not that far inferior to Bowes and Tate of his era. Obviously it is meddling with statistics, so take it with a grain of salt, but very rarely these days do you see bowlers playing when sick.
|
That's arguably the best point you've made, if truth be told. But as you say, it's "not that inferior" to bowlers that are not even thought of as ATGs in some corners of the site (Bowes most certainly isn't). Surely the greatest bowler of all-time would be far and away in front?