Which player would you wish to see reincarnate?

[zaremba]

zaremba, why specifically Frank Woolley?

I'd love to see Bradman, Trumper, Grace et al but Woolley was a stand-out name that hadn't been mentioned.

Everything you read about Woolley suggests that he was an incredible player to watch.

Here are Wisden and RL Arrowsmith quoted on cricinfo:

Frank Edward Woolley, who died aged 91, was beyond doubt one of the finest and most elegant left-handed all-rounders of all time. In a first-class career extending from 1906 to 1938 he hit 58,969 runs - a total exceeded only by Sir Jack Hobbs - including 145 centuries, to average 40.75; he took 2,068 wickets for 19.85 runs each, and he held 1,015 catches, mainly at slip, a record which remains unsurpassed.

Even more impressive than the number of runs Woolley amassed was the manner in which he made them. Standing well over six feet, he was a joy to watch. He played an eminently straight bat, employed his long reach to full advantage, and used his feet in a manner nowadays rarely seen. His timing of the ball approached perfection and he generally dealt surely with all types of bowling. Master of all the strokes, he was at his best driving, cutting, and turning the ball off his legs.

Frank Woolley was a slow left-arm bowler with a beautiful action who took over 2,000 wickets and was at one time perhaps the best of his type in the world. He caught during his career far more catches than anyone else, except wicketkeepers, yet it is as a batsman that he is primarily remembered. Few now alive have seen a player who approached him in ease and grace, and his average rate of scoring has been exceeded only by Jessop and equalled by Trumper. His philosophy was to dominate the bowler. "When I am batting," he said, "I am the attack.."

Now that's a player I would like to have the chance to watch.

 

[The Sean]

"When you bowled to him there weren't enough fielders, when you wrote about him there weren't enough words."

Good call Mr Z - he must have been fantastic to watch.

 

[L Trumper]

Gilbert Jessop is missed in the list so far. He'll be my first choice along with Victor Trumper

 

[GotSpin]

His record is a phenomenal one when you bear in mind he was still only 21 when he played his last match, and that he'd always had fitness problems - those who saw him bat who always maintained he was a great in the offing (Bradman included) were waxing just as lyrical before his death as after

Even though he was 21 when he played his last match his results previously weren't that amazing. He'd still managed to get in 75 FC matches and averaged in the mid 40s. I know averages don't tell the whole story but this is a decent sample size and surely an indicator of his talent which is all I can go off. I thought he was in good health until season 1932-33

If he had lived, I imagine he would have been one of the greats of his time. However, I don't think we would have had two Bradmans running around together. Yes I've read that he was rated as a greater talent than Bradman during their youth but I think to consider him as another Bradman 'never to been' is a step too far.

 

[Teja.]

Even though he was 21 when he played his last match his results previously weren't that amazing. He'd still managed to get in 75 FC matches and averaged in the mid 40s. I know averages don't tell the whole story but this is a decent sample size and surely an indicator of his talent which is all I can go off. I thought he was in good health until season 1932-33

If he had lived, I imagine he would have been one of the greats of his time. However, I don't think we would have had two Bradmans running around together. Yes I've read that he was rated as a greater talent than Bradman during their youth but I think to consider him as another Bradman 'never to been' is a step too far.

I never meant he would be even close to batsman Bradman was, and it is true that he was somewhat overrated due to his early death. In my opinion, he would have been one of the leading Batsman of his day along with Hammond, Mccabe et al.

 

[GotSpin]

I never meant he would be even close to batsman Bradman was, and it is true that he was somewhat overrated due to his early death. In my opinion, he would have been one of the leading Batsman of his day along with Hammond, Mccabe et al.

Yeah I wasn't specifically referring to your post, just a general comment about Jackson himself

 

[fredfertang]

Even though he was 21 when he played his last match his results previously weren't that amazing. He'd still managed to get in 75 FC matches and averaged in the mid 40s. I know averages don't tell the whole story but this is a decent sample size and surely an indicator of his talent which is all I can go off. I thought he was in good health until season 1932-33

If he had lived, I imagine he would have been one of the greats of his time. However, I don't think we would have had two Bradmans running around together. Yes I've read that he was rated as a greater talent than Bradman during their youth but I think to consider him as another Bradman 'never to been' is a step too far.

According to his biographer he always had fitness problems - in particular, given the times in which he played, he struggled to bat for long periods - after his 164 on Test debut, for example, he was so knackered he couldn't field in the England second innings.

He also seems to have lacked the ruthless singlemindedness that Bradman had, and I can't imagine he'd have ended up with a comparable record, but he seems to have been a very special talent - but I do accept an early death is generally a useful reputation enhancer

Another highly regarded Aussie batsman from that era was Karl Schneider who died of leukaemia in 1928 at 23

 

[stumpski]

Funny, I've just been reading David Frith's book on Jackson - 34 years after its publication. One worthy of review, surely.