This is not the traditional thinking in NZ, though.Either position actually. Wi had both Viv and Brian at 3 and 4. NZ their best is at 3. Then again India and Australia have their best at 4 and before Kohli, Sachin was at 4. So I'd say both 3 and 4 tend to have the best player.
I respectfully disagree. I can only think of Gavaskar, Hobbs and Hutton who were the best among their teammates. Ditto number 5s like Waugh and Sobers.Not always. Many openers have been the best batsmen in their teams. Sobers, S Waugh, and Clarke had times of being the best and being at 5, while Vettori was the best for 2-3 years and was at 8!
No. Gooch wasn't better than Gower, Anwar wasn't better than Inzi and Cook wasn't better than Kevin.For openers, Cook, Gooch, Vaughan, Karunaratne, Brathwaite and Anwar have all been their teams best bats at points and opened
Gooch was clearly better than Gower towards the end of their careers, Anwar was certainly better in the 90's before average inflation occurred and from 2010-2014 Cook was streets ahead of KevNo. Gooch wasn't better than Gower, Anwar wasn't better than Inzi and Cook wasn't better than Kevin.
The fact of the matter is, you look at most teams, their best tend to be middle order and particularly 3 and 4. Maybe that's because opening is inherently more difficult idk.
I think it's more a case of he was never mentioned in the same terms as May and Compton - I bet if we had an "England players draft" Barrington would get picked before them.Barrington has a really top record at 3 and is a much underrated player - nowhere more so than in England.
He's never mentioned in the same terms as the likes of Hammond, May, Hutton, Hobbs and Compton.
Maybe it's due to his style of batting or the fact he was better abroad than at home but the more you analyse his stats, the more impressive a player he looks.