sayon basak
International Coach
Who was a better cricketer between the two Bills?
-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Bill Ponsford vs Bill Lawry
- Thread starter sayon basak
- Start date
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
International 12th Man
Ponsford for me every time. His weakness to pace is kinda overstated. Great player of spin and had unbelievable concentration. Don’t think Lawry or Simpson who seems to have been overrated here in recent times were any better batsman at all.
The two I would have competing for the slot opening alongside Hayden in an Aussie ATG XI these days. Could go either way here. Agree with @Patience and Accuracy+Gut that Simpson is overrated here. A lot of soft runs.
capt_Luffy
Hall of Fame Member
I love Ponsford, but he takes a hit on longevity points....
capt_Luffy
Hall of Fame Member
Just take Trumper....
Coronis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I’m curious how one might come to that conclusion, considering how Simpson and Lawry batted together for the majority of their careers, and Simpson outperformed him clearly during that time, particularly away.
Simpson only really consistently opened once the good batting period circa 1963 and did his best work over the following few years. Lawry was always an opener and his best work was done in his first few years, when batting was still very challenging. His Lord's and Old Trafford efforts won Australia the series in 1961 for example. Simpson never did that; a scorer of fair weather runs.
If I'm taking Trumper it's in the middle order and I'm not dropping either Chappell or Border for him. I might have dropped Waugh pre-Smith though.
Patience and Accuracy+Gut
International 12th Man
I would say Trumper is a automatic choice as well and as a opener. A genius is a genius and I think runs in middle order/ opener position isn’t much to take in concentration about when talking about Trumper’s era.
capt_Luffy
Hall of Fame Member
Man just go off..... You're always so salty about Trumper. His reputation is built on his early English tours and scoring fast runs in sticky dogs. Later, he suffered from health conditions and still had the highest FC average while retiring among retired players. You can of course just go off scorecards, but with so much context lost to time, I feel it's disingenuous for Pre WWI cricketers.
Coronis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Clem Hill was simply better and more consistent.
capt_Luffy
Hall of Fame Member
Still averages 2 runs less in FC.....
Coronis
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Ponsford averages 15 more than McCabe in FC. Hassett averages 8 more than Harvey in FC. Michael Bevan and Darren Lehmann average 6 more in FC than Steve Waugh.
capt_Luffy
Hall of Fame Member
Except that FC was much more important pre War and almost had equal importance to Test matches.....
ataraxia
International Coach
McCabe was **** and Hassett gun – but, in general, the Sheffield Shield produced absurdly high averages in the 1920s and immediately post-war. Both those comparisons are therefore a little iffy on the era front. Percentage of FC matches on tour is also extremely important.
