Fred Trueman vs. Alan Davidson

[Ikki]

Fred Trueman

Alan Davidson

Both played around the same time and both usually very underrated. Given the choice, who would you pick and why?

 

[Burgey]

Purely as bowlers, I take it?

Very difficult one IMO. Probably Trueman given his better SR, though it's really a toss of the coin for mine.

Although according to current CW logic, given Davo played and excelled in the subcontinent, whereas Trueman didn't play there, Davo MUST be better.

At least, I think that's how it works around here......

 

[Top_Cat]

Not old enough to have seen them play.

 

[funnygirl]

Not old enough to have seen them play.

same for me as well .Mere statistical judgement may not be true .

 

[FRAZ]

Trueman's s/r is just amazing .

 

[archie mac]

Not old enough to have seen them play.

Read a book

 

[Top_Cat]

Read a book

I've read plenty about both but there's no substitute for seeing them live.

 

[Craig]

Not old enough to have seen them play.

Fence sitter

It was a hard one, but I chose Trueman even though I couldn't decide on which one to vote for. Davidson was a top notch all rounder though. I thought I would get my bit in before Richard posts and Kazololic calls his opinions dire and it just goes around in circles and everybody falls asleep

 

[fredfertang]

I think the main reason for these two being underrated today is that the late 50’s/early 60’s era, when they played a lot of their tests, is not, with the honourable exception of the 60/61 WI/Aus series, often remembered today.

Davidson, according to all of his peers whose comments I have read, was very highly rated and clearly a great “team man” as well.

Fiery Fred though was a remarkable bowler as that strike rate shows – I only saw him at the end of his career when, like Sir Richard Hadlee later, he was no longer a tearaway but by all accounts he was very very sharp in his early years.

The man himself would say he was “’t finest bloody fast bowler who ever drew breath” – he had his tongue in his cheek at the time he said it but at the same time I am sure there was no doubt in his mind it was true

I’m not quite sure I’d go that far but I would rate him above Davidson

 

[sanga1337]

Surprised Davidson hasn't got a single vote yet.

 

[bagapath]

of course, both are all-time greats of the game. i would choose them both in the 1945 - 1965 world XI. but davidson had more success in away games than fred. also he was a more than handy batsman. voting for alan davidsoon coz he doesnt deserve to be ignored.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Surprised Davidson hasn't got a single vote yet.

He does have one now which is even more surprising - though it seems to be a sympathy vote.

 

[Ikki]

I agree. I don't see this as one-sided at all. The difference in their SR is evenly matched by the difference in ER. And unlike the Warne/O'Reilly difference in overs bowled, the difference between Davidson and Trueman is 6 overs worth.

Their career stats in match situation:

Trueman:

Overs   Runs   Wickets
  38     99      4.6

Davidson:

Overs   Runs   Wickets
  44     87      4.2

Note: I decided to not completely round off the wickets to a single unit as I think it would be misleading.

Another interesting aspect that I should have showed is their home and away form.

Trueman:

Davidson:

Trueman plays mostly at home whilst Davidson mostly away. Also Davidson has the superior away record whilst Trueman better at home. In attempt to even this I've given Trueman the same proportion of away balls/games as Davidson.

 

[Ikki]

Stats-aside, does anyone have any info they'd like to share between the two? Like who was considered better in their own era. Their great feats or other abilities not reflected in stats? I am only aware of these two in their statistical record as I am, of course, not old enough to have seen them.

I am surprised Davidson doesn't get more mention considering he has done well everywhere.

 

[steds]

And unlike the Warne/O'Reilly difference in overs bowled, the difference between Davidson and Trueman is 6 overs worth.

Weren't they still using 8 ball overs in Aus when Davison played though? Would change the dynamics a bit, imo.

 

[Ikki]

Weren't they still using 8 ball overs in Aus when Davison played though? Would change the dynamics a bit, imo.

That's something I didn't address.

But to clarify, when I mention the difference in overs I tallied their career balls bowled and divided by 6. So the stats assume they're bowling 6 ball overs.

 

[Flem274*]

Davidson. Just because I can.

Tbh I reverted to the old "close your eyes and click" method of choosing.

 

[SJS]

I agree. I don't see this as one-sided at all. The difference in their SR is evenly matched by the difference in ER. And unlike the Warne/O'Reilly difference in overs bowled, the difference between Davidson and Trueman is 6 overs worth.

Their career stats in match situation:

Trueman:

Overs   Runs   Wickets
  38     99      4.6

Davidson:

Overs   Runs   Wickets
  44     87      4.2

Note: I decided to not completely round off the wickets to a single unit as I think it would be misleading.

Another interesting aspect that I should have showed is their home and away form.

Trueman:

Davidson:

Trueman plays mostly at home whilst Davidson mostly away. Also Davidson has the superior away record whilst Trueman better at home. In attempt to even this I've given Trueman the same proportion of away balls/games as Davidson.

Very much impressed by the attention to detail, particularly the number of Trueman's away wickets to the nearest one/millionth of a wicket !!

 

[Flem274*]

Very much impressed by the attention to detail, particularly the number of Trueman's away wickets to the nearest one/millionth of a wicket !!

 

[Ikki]

Very much impressed by the attention to detail, particularly the number of Trueman's away wickets to the nearest one/millionth of a wicket !!

LOL, TBH I am the exact opposite - not much attention placed on detail otherwise I would have rounded them off but I just let the figures stay exact. Was Excel's fault .