George Headley or Graeme Pollock

[Engle]

Two legendary batsmen, arguably the best from their countries with almost identical stats.
Who was the greater batsmen IYO and why ?
G.Headley
Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50
Tests 22 40 4 2190 270* 60.83 10 5

G.Pollock
Mat Inns NO Runs HS Ave 100 50
Tests 23 41 4 2256 274 60.97 7 11

 

[Goughy]

Amazingly similar stats. Both brilliant players.

I have no idea what the answer to the question is though. 10 years ago Id have shaded towards Headley and now Id may shade towards Pollock. Given that I cant really split them

 

[Days of Grace]

Since both of them only played relatively few test matches, perhaps it's better to compare them on first-class stats:

Headley

M: I: No: Runs: Ave: 100s\50s
103 164 22 9921 344* 69.86 33 44


Pollock:

M: I: No: Runs Ave: 100s/50s
262 437 54 20940 274 54.67 64 99


On those stats, you would have to learn towards Headley. He also played a few matches after World War II, when he was way past his prime, so if he stayed retired after WWII, he would have averaged over 70. The black Bradman indeed.

 

[Ikki]

Waiting on a comment by Neville, Archie or SJS. I don't know too much about the two batsmen in question other than the generalities.

 

[The Sean]

Waiting on a comment by Neville, Archie or SJS. I don't know too much about the two batsmen in question other than the generalities.

Meh, what do those three hacks know?

 

[The Sean]

Surprised by the lack of outrage over the poll not being public TBH. Usually only have to wait a minute or two for a "Public Polls FFS" kind of post.

 

[TT Boy]

Since both of them only played relatively few test matches, perhaps it's better to compare them on first-class stats:

Headley

M: I: No: Runs: Ave: 100s\50s
103 164 22 9921 344* 69.86 33 44


Pollock:

M: I: No: Runs Ave: 100s/50s
262 437 54 20940 274 54.67 64 99


On those stats, you would have to learn towards Headley. He also played a few matches after World War II, when he was way past his prime, so if he stayed retired after WWII, he would have averaged over 70. The black Bradman indeed.

TBF to Pollock, a sizeable amount of his first class career was conducted on notoriously the most difficult surface in South African cricket, the ‘The Green Mamba’ aka the Wanderers. A track were most sides were routinely rolled out for less than 100, Graeme got runs by the bucket load and the majority of them being on his lonesome.

Comparably to Graeme, Jimmy Cook only averaged 43 for Transvaal (over 70 for Somerset), Clive Rice 36, Kevin McKenzie 37 and Henry Fotheringham 39, whilst in 60 odd first class games for 'The Mean Machine', Pollock had an average over 55 and he didn’t make his first class ‘debut’ for Transvaal until his 34th (?) birthday. A truly remarkable cricketer.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Any call one makes is going to be arbitrary; I personally lean towards Headley because he was playing in an inferior team and was largely carrying their batting.

It does raise an interesting question: is 2000 runs a sufficiently large enough sample for conclusions to be drawn? I ask this with particular regards to one MEK Hussey who currently retains the frankly Bradmanesque average of 82.38 (!) having scored 1730 test runs. When discussing the world's best current bats Hussey's name is usually only mentioned as an afterthought, if at all, based on the relative brevity of his career so far; yet when those lists of best ever batsmen appear Pollock & Headley are invariably in there. In fact it's something of a sibboleth of being a cricket nerd to be able to recite Pollock's average IMHO, most casual fans know 99.94, if you know 60.97 too you've moved up a level.

Anyway, the chances are that Hussey will pass 2000 runs with an average far in excess of either who could then (god forbid) walk out in front of a bus and never play again. Would he be considered the second best batter of all time? I have my doubts. Should we therefore ignore Headley and Pollock and say Herb Sutcliffe's 60.73 is the second highest meaningful average?

 

[Engle]

Surprised by the lack of outrage over the poll not being public TBH. Usually only have to wait a minute or two for a "Public Polls FFS" kind of post.

No reason other than lack of expertise in debut poll. If someone can change this, pls go ahead.

 

[Richard]

Sadly not. Once a poll's posted-up, it's private or public to stay.

In any case: Headley, for mine. If I had to go for someone as 2nd-best batsman of the Test era, he'd be the one I'd go for.

 

[neville cardus]

My parochial prejudices shout, "Pollock!", but my admiration of triumph over adversity and success in spite of the failings of one's peers sends my vote sailing proudly in the direction of Headley. 'Twas not for nothing that he was monikered Atlas; Pollock never had to bear anything like the same burden.

 

[neville cardus]

Since both of them only played relatively few test matches, perhaps it's better to compare them on first-class stats:
Headley
M: I: No: Runs: Ave: 100s\50s
103 164 22 9921 344* 69.86 33 44
Pollock:
M: I: No: Runs Ave: 100s/50s
262 437 54 20940 274 54.67 64 99
On those stats, you would have to learn towards Headley. He also played a few matches after World War II, when he was way past his prime, so if he stayed retired after WWII, he would have averaged over 70. The black Bradman indeed.

Grossly misleading, those stats. The West Indian bowling of Headley's era was in no way equal to that of the South African bowling of Pollock's.

 

[neville cardus]

Meh, what do those three hacks know?

And I thought my knowledgeable façade full-proof.

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

Headley it has to be. What sealed it was his incredible conversion rate of fifties into centuries.

 

[neville cardus]

[...]

In fact it's something of a sibboleth of being a cricket nerd

[...]

I'm not usually bamboozled in the vocab stakes, but that's got me -- unless, of course, you're referring to "shibboleth".

[...]

Should we therefore ignore Headley and Pollock and say Herb Sutcliffe's 60.73 is the second highest meaningful average?

It is strange how few remember Herbert's conspicuous success at the highest level. It was said, though (much to his chagrin), that he benefited from Hobbs's protection.

 

[deira]

its amazing in 24 years from 1930 to 1954 Headley only played 22 tests. How they played so few tests back then?

 

[Shaggy Alfresco]

its amazing in 24 years from 1930 to 1954 Headley only played 22 tests. How they played so few tests back then?

He only ever played 3 tests postwar. Two in 1948 and one in 1954, all when he was past his sell-by-date. His average would have been 66.7 if he had retired before playing those three.

 

[BoyBrumby]

[...]

I'm not usually bamboozled in the vocab stakes, but that's got me -- unless, of course, you're referring to "shibboleth".

Eeek.

Quite.

 

[social]

This is like comparing Rod Laver to Lacoste

In name, Pollock and Headley both played cricket but that's where the similarities end.

Headley was a rank amateur with a great record against nobodys

Pollock slaughtered the best of his generation, was the greatest member of possibly the best team in history, and was still annihilating top-class bowler well into his 40s

 

[pasag]