The third best spinner of all time?

[kyear2]

In place of whom? Warne or Mcgrath?

Don't personally see how one could consistently and accurately bowl leg spin at 80mph.

 

[Coronis]

In place of whom? Warne or Mcgrath?

Don't personally see how one could consistently and accurately bowl leg spin at 80mph.

Maybe because you never saw Barnes. Personally, I'd replace Warne. Barnes gets his wickets far cheaper, and with a much lower strike rate too.

 

[watson]

In place of whom? Warne or Mcgrath?

Don't personally see how one could consistently and accurately bowl leg spin at 80mph.

The article said that he didn't bowl flat-out all the time. If the pitch wasn't hard with much bounce he would bowl slower, and presumerably impart more spin/turn on the ball.

I'll draw up an ATG team that includes Barnes, and post it in the ATG thread.

 

[Maximas]

I think there is no doubt that Barnes was probably one of the greatest bowlers of all time, he would certainly find his way into my ATG team. However whether or not you call him a genuine spinner is another question. I don't know how to answer it to be honest.

 

[kyear2]

Maybe because you never saw Barnes. Personally, I'd replace Warne. Barnes gets his wickets far cheaper, and with a much lower strike rate too.

He averaged that on pre war pitches, not quite what Warne had to bowl on and his average was greatly aided by playing 7 Tests againts S.A where he avereged 9 with a s/r of 25.

 

[the big bambino]

Even so Barnes averaged 10 runs a wicket fewer than the global average in the period he was playing tests.

 

[Coronis]

Even so Barnes averaged 10 runs a wicket fewer than the global average in the period he was playing tests.

Plus, pretty much everyone who saw him bowl, or played against him claimed he was the greatest bowler of all time.

 

[the big bambino]

Plus Barnes played only 7 of the 21 tests Eng and SA contested against each other in his test playing era. It boggles to think what he would have achieved if he played most of those.

 

[Coronis]

Imagine if he actually played the 5th test of the 1913-14 series. He already took 49 wickets in the first 4, which still holds the series record. Only 3 others have taken above 40 wickets in a 5 match series (all spinners, naturally).

 

[wellAlbidarned]

In place of whom? Warne or Mcgrath?

Don't personally see how one could consistently and accurately bowl leg spin at 80mph.

That's because he almost certainly didn't bowl them at 80mph, that'd be absolutely absurd. My guess would be that his leg cutters/breaks were 65-70ish with an 80 seam-up quicker ball.

 

[kyear2]

Was just responding to a previous post.

 

[Dan]

I think there is no doubt that Barnes was probably one of the greatest bowlers of all time, he would certainly find his way into my ATG team. However whether or not you call him a genuine spinner is another question. I don't know how to answer it to be honest.

Why are we thinking exclusively in a spinner/pacer dichotomy? It's a spectrum IMO. You get blokes who are very slow and turn the ball appreciably within the 'spin' category (like a Warne), and then you get a Kumble who has been treated in the past as a medium pacer bowling leg cutters. They aren't the same.

Then you get guys bowling 120km/h with some seam movement either way - they're quick bowlers. But then so are the 150+km/h bowlers who get a little swing but not much else. Big difference, same category.

Barnes is dead centre of this hypothetical spectrum, IMO.