Most bowlers of the pre 1970s bowled at relatively low average batsmen. Aside from a short Bradman era.No love for Sydney Barnes huh?
The era from Hobbs saw a significant rise in batting averages. I've always assumed this was to do with better wickets.Most bowlers of the pre 1970s bowled at relatively low average batsmen. Aside from a short Bradman era.
Not the Beeb at it again? Snow.Why are people even taking this seriously? It's so obviously tongue-in-cheek clickbait that isn't actually claiming Hoggard is England's best ever bowler -- it's an interesting statistical exercise with no relevance beyond itself, and they pretty clearly recognise that.
The correct answer is Larwood, ftr.
Wrong. Larwood.Snow.
Oh well then, that's it then.English cricket is senseless.From what I've seen their best bowler has been Anderson.He has been good in SC as well.He has got Sachin out most no.of times than any other bowler
If that's what the article does, then yep it's stupid. Essentially punishes a bowler for being better at taking wickets.I'm terrible with these things but the formula seems flawed. If bowler A and B have got 10 wickets of a batsman averaging 50 each they'll have the same rating. If A goes on to take an additional wicket of some tailender his rating suffers. Can't see any logic there.
Have you read Duncan Hamilton's bio? One of the greatest cricket books of all time.Wrong. Larwood.
I will go to my grave proclaiming Larwood as England's best ever bowler, and, in all likelihood, the greatest bowler of all time. So I'm not exactly objective.
Depends on length of batsmen's careerIf that's what the article does, then yep it's stupid. Essentially punishes a bowler for being better at taking wickets.
It's the same with stats like %age of centuries in winning causes. Batsman A has 15 out of his 45 in wins. Batsman B has 15 out of 16 in wins. Therefore, Batsman B is a better match winner and a better batsman. Makes a whole lot of sense doesn't it
Only a couple of times. Probably due a re-read, now that you mention it. Absolutely brilliant book.Have you read Duncan Hamilton's bio? One of the greatest cricket books of all time.
Larwood was a tremendous bowler. And at the end of the book I almost liked Jardine.