Hobbs vs Sutcliffe vs Hammond vs Hutton. Who was the best batsmen?

[Fuller Pilch]

197

Has been amended up to 199 due to 2 centuries he got on a tour to what was then Ceylon - games have been granted 1st class status

 

[fredfertang]

Has been amended up to 199 due to 2 centuries he got on a tour to what was then Ceylon - games have been granted 1st class status

I have a great deal of respect for the work the ACS have done on reclassifying some old matches but they have done themselves and the game a disservice on that one - Hobbs himself always accepted those two were scored in exhibition matches in India the main purpose of which were for him to score centuries - unless they've changed their mind Wisden never accepted the 199 figure

 

[The Sean]

Has been amended up to 199 due to 2 centuries he got on a tour to what was then Ceylon - games have been granted 1st class status

That was a ridiculous decision - not even Hobbs thought they should have counted.

 

[Zinzan]

Hobbs was the best, but gave my vote to Hammond because it's criminal Hutton should be ahead of him 5 votes to 1.

 

[viriya]

Barrington.

 

[Zinzan]

Hobbs - 199 1st class centuries. To put it in context Sachin 'only' scored 81

197

197 is correct according to his FC record, but I have heard this '199' figure bandied about as well. I'm not sure, but there may have been a couple of hundreds credited to him earlier, which were later deemed as not being FC level.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Michael Slater - lol? Could have at least had Bradman or a modern great

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=09SDSixYhfs

Great movie though

 

[Zinzan]

Michael Slater - lol? Could have at least had Bradman or a modern great

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=09SDSixYhfs

Haha, even at the 250K+ stage on millionaire, they still need at least one soft-ball option

 

[harsh.ag]

Hobbs was the best, but gave my vote to Hammond because it's criminal Hutton should be ahead of him 5 votes to 1.

Nah it isn't. Even though it serves to take a little sheen off of the Don, the inter-war period was easier for batsmen compared to the post wwii period of Hutton. Well, at least that seems to be the consensus from things I've read.

 

[Zinzan]

That's interesting & may well be a valid point, but from what I've read from cricket historians and past players suggested to me that the consensus was Hammond was only 2nd to Hobbs and generally regarded as > Hutton.

I might need to do a deeper dive into this.