• 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.

Does anybody dispute this about Bill O'Rielly?

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Some people thought Arthur Mailey was better than Grimmett, too - and IMO that'd be like saying MacGill was better than Warne or May was better than Barrington.
Looking at his Test performances I think it's a pretty far-fetched idea to claim that Maily was better than Grimmett. The guy didn't even take 100 wickets, and his average is almost 10 runs higher than Grimmett's. I'm not disputing that Mailey wasn't a very good bowler, beacuse he quite clearly was, but the lack of performances at Test level discount him IMO.
 

archie mac

International Coach
Looking at his Test performances I think it's a pretty far-fetched idea to claim that Maily was better than Grimmett. The guy didn't even take 100 wickets, and his average is almost 10 runs higher than Grimmett's. I'm not disputing that Mailey wasn't a very good bowler, beacuse he quite clearly was, but the lack of performances at Test level discount him IMO.
Again it was a different time, and his job was to take wickets, which he tried to do with every ball. He would have lost some time to the Great War, his best from memory was 9-121. And he would have been judged only on the wickets taken:)
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Again it was a different time, and his job was to take wickets, which he tried to do with every ball. He would have lost some time to the Great War, his best from memory was 9-121. And he would have been judged only on the wickets taken:)
Oh I fully realise that we are talking about different time periods here but the fact he hasn't even taken 100 wickets limits how highly I rank him and that's just a personal thing. His best bowling was indeed 9-121, good guess :p
 

archie mac

International Coach
Oh I fully realise that we are talking about different time periods here but the fact he hasn't even taken 100 wickets limits how highly I rank him and that's just a personal thing. His best bowling was indeed 9-121, good guess :p

99 is pretty close:-O

And as no team visited Aust between 1920/1921 to 1924/25 and then again to 1928/29 there was not a lot of chances to take many more
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
NC said; one bowled like a millionaire the other a pauper (or something like that)

In defence of AM he was told by most of his captains that his job was to take wickets not to save runs. And famously on one occasion Armstrong took him off after he had bowled a very tight spell telling him just that.

It should also be remembered in AMs day that Tests and SS matches were all played to a finish regardless of time, and it was more important to claim wickets then to save runs
I know. What I've never understood is why Grimmett didn't get similar instructions. :huh:
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Looking at his Test performances I think it's a pretty far-fetched idea to claim that Maily was better than Grimmett. The guy didn't even take 100 wickets, and his average is almost 10 runs higher than Grimmett's. I'm not disputing that Mailey wasn't a very good bowler, beacuse he quite clearly was, but the lack of performances at Test level discount him IMO.
Again it was a different time, and his job was to take wickets, which he tried to do with every ball. He would have lost some time to the Great War, his best from memory was 9-121. And he would have been judged only on the wickets taken:)
Yeah, as Sean said - those who rated Mailey > Grimmett would have been doing it on the "take wickets at all costs" proviso. A bad way of rating things IMO, and one that, rather than going out-of-date, has simply come to be realised to have been wrong.
 

JASON

Cricketer Of The Year
After Murali and Warne, I rank Clarrie Grimmett ahead of Tiger O Reilly.

Clarrie Grimmett was a genuine wicket taker and was regarded very highly by those who played in that era and definitely considered better than Tiger, from what I have read.

It would be interesting to hear someone like SJS's (who is very knowledgeable on these issues) views on this matter .

IIRC, Tiger O'Relly and Sir Don Bradman did not get on well during their playing days or some such reason was attributed to Sir Don apparently selectively ignoring Tiger on several occasions for selection despite his availability .

They (Sir Don and Tiger) only made up in the 80's or 90's after a long period of dislike for each other despite respect for each other's abilities and prowess on the cricket field.

"Grimm" as he was fondly called by his Team mates and by Tiger was always the first choce wicket taker even when he played alongside O Reilly. It was only towards the end of his career that Tiger (because of his younger age then) was regarded slightly better from my reading.

You have to also remember Grimmett started playing Test Cricket quite late (IIRC in his 30s) and played quite late .(into 40s).
 
Last edited:

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
A little bit off topic, but reading about how Bill O'Reilly and Sir Donald Bradman had their own differences I was just wondering if Sir Donald Bradman wasn't a particularly likeable person. I think I remember something about him and Keith Miller having different views on a few things and I was just wondering if Bradman wasn't the easiest to get along with.
 

archie mac

International Coach
A little bit off topic, but reading about how Bill O'Reilly and Sir Donald Bradman had their own differences I was just wondering if Sir Donald Bradman wasn't a particularly likeable person. I think I remember something about him and Keith Miller having different views on a few things and I was just wondering if Bradman wasn't the easiest to get along with.

He was respected but not liked by a number of his team mates, including; Tiger, Fingleton, Vic Richardson, Grimmett (especially later in his career), and the author RS Whitington
 

archie mac

International Coach
After Murali and Warne, I rank Clarrie Grimmett ahead of Tiger O Reilly.

Clarrie Grimmett was a genuine wicket taker and was regarded very highly by those who played in that era and definitely considered better than Tiger, from what I have read.

It would be interesting to hear someone like SJS's (who is very knowledgeable on these issues) views on this matter .

IIRC, Tiger O'Relly and Sir Don Bradman did not get on well during their playing days or some such reason was attributed to Sir Don apparently selectively ignoring Tiger on several occasions for selection despite his availability .

They (Sir Don and Tiger) only made up in the 80's or 90's after a long period of dislike for each other despite respect for each other's abilities and prowess on the cricket field.

"Grimm" as he was fondly called by his Team mates and by Tiger was always the first choce wicket taker even when he played alongside O Reilly. It was only towards the end of his career that Tiger (because of his younger age then) was regarded slightly better from my reading.

You have to also remember Grimmett started playing Test Cricket quite late (IIRC in his 30s) and played quite late .(into 40s).

I can't remember reading that any of his contemporaries rated Grum above Tiger:unsure:

You have Grimmett and O'Reilly mixed up with regards to Bradman leaving one of them out of his Test teams. He left Grimmett out of the Tests 1936/37 and out of the tour of 1938, something that neither Grimmett or Tiger ever forgave Bradman
 
Last edited:

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
He was respected but not liked by a number of his team mates, including; Tiger, Fingleton, Vic Richardson, Grimmett (especially later in his career), and the author RS Whitington
It would be insane for people not to respect him, due to his amazing acheivements on the cricket pitch but I do find it quite surprising that people didn't like him.
 

archie mac

International Coach
It would be insane for people not to respect him, due to his amazing acheivements on the cricket pitch but I do find it quite surprising that people didn't like him.

He apparently had a habit of lecturing his team mates about drinking and smoking something he did not do. Also he would stay in his room and play records and not socialise with the other players.

On the 1930 trip he was given a gift of 1000 pounds by an admirer after a triple ton in one of the Tests, and did not share any of the prize money with his team mates.

Also he was whisked off after the team arrived back in Perth, and flown all over the country, some players considered this as 'stealing their thunder'

It should be remembered that Tiger and Fingleton did not tour in 1930
 

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
He was respected but not liked by a number of his team mates, including; Tiger, Fingleton, Vic Richardson, Grimmett (especially later in his career), and the author RS Whitington
A lot to do with becoming a good English-style gentleman, as well as the other things you've already mentioned. The Irish Catholic descendents like O'Reilly and Fingleton were never too happy about that.
 

Matt79

Global Moderator
Yeah The Don was as focused and single-minded a competitor as ever there was - as evidenced by his record. Lots of his team mates, famously Miller, found his attitude of win-at-all-costs and grind your already beaten opponents even further into the ground, fairly distasteful and unpleasant (but ironically, its an attitude that would have seemed pretty mild you'd think in comparison to how Australian teams under Border, Waugh and Ponting have played). Miller, remember, had spent many years in England, playing cricket, during the war, and was not able to consider them the "enemy" in the way Bradman and Hammond regarded each other. He also thought that cricket was in the final equation a game, and that having nearly died at least three times during the war, he, along with other ex-servicemen, found it ludicrous to be asked to treat Test cricket as warfare.

Regarding the Protestant-Catholic split and the O'Reilly-Fingleton faction versus Bradman, tbh, I've always thought it said more about Fingleton et al, than it did about Bradman.

I think lots of players who played with Don got on with him just fine, but they probably weren't as a rule, as proliferate in writing and publicizing their opinions as Fingleton and O'Reilly. I know Lindwall for one said that he found Bradman to be a very considerate leader and a really astute captain.
 
Last edited:

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Regarding the Protestant-Catholic split and the O'Reilly-Fingleton faction versus Bradman, tbh, I've always thought it said more about Fingleton et al, than it did about Bradman.
Oh, me too, very much so.
 

Goughy

Hall of Fame Member
Bradman was a pretty old-school example of the austere, frugal and hard-working Protestant where diligently and efficiently doing your duty was very important.

There was the inevitable clashes and dislike between himself and those that led a more colouful and outgoing existence (which many Catholics did).
 

Top