Peter May vs Geoff Boycott

[trundler]

May was probably a lot better than his raw numbers make him seem. Played in some of the most low scoring test matches on average for any great cricketer. The overall batting average for tests he played is only 26 which is ridiculously low :

Aggregate/overall records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

IIRC, he usually gets a very sizeable adjustment to his average in most standardisation exercises I've seen. @Prince EWS to confirm.

I know this but I think that's somewhat exaggerated by playing against 2000s Bangladesh tier NZ a lot. Still a pretty gun home record though. It's the midness of his away record that bothers me. Apparently the overall average in his away tests is only 27 too but he still only averaged 35 away. Anyway, that's probably a Walcott-esque difference in context so you've convinced me that he's still better than Boycott despite being an old timey HTB.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

So… still longer than May’s? Besides he literally played tests in 16 of those 18 years.

England played 172 tests during Boycotts career and he only played 108 of those. It was basically a 11 year career like Cooks.

 

[BazBall21]

May was probably a lot better than his raw numbers make him seem. Played in some of the most low scoring test matches on average for any great cricketer. The overall batting average for tests he played is only 26 which is ridiculously low :

Aggregate/overall records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPNcricinfo.com

stats.espncricinfo.com

IIRC, he usually gets a very sizeable adjustment to his average in most standardisation exercises I've seen. @Prince EWS to confirm.

His adjusted average is 57 and his adjusted away average is 42. A statistican I know calculates them.

Playing for a team with a strong bowling attack might help his image a bit there but he clearly played in very tough conditions.

I'm not big on ICC ratings but I think his peak there is still something like top 10 ever after some great series v strong Australian and South African bowling attacks. Fair point from @trundler that he did a bit of New Zealand bashing.

 

[Coronis]

His adjusted average is 57 and his adjusted away average is 42. A statistican I know calculates them.

Playing for a team with a strong bowling attack might help his image a bit there but he clearly played in very tough conditions.

I'm not big on ICC ratings but I think his peak there is still something like top 10 ever after some great series v strong Australian and South African bowling attacks. Fair point from @trundler that he did some New Zealand bashing.

fwiw, he has the 6th best rating (941) on the ICC rankings, behind Bradman, Smith, Hutton, Hobbs and Ponting.

This comes from the basis of the two preceeding home series, vs SA in 1955 and vs Aus in 1956. Both series he was the top scorer by about 90 runs, and in both series he faced bowlers who were ranked in the top 5 at that point in time (Tayfield, Lindwall, Miller)

 

[capt_Luffy]

fwiw, he has the 6th best rating (941) on the ICC rankings, behind Bradman, Smith, Hutton, Hobbs and Ponting.

This comes from the basis of the two preceeding home series, vs SA in 1955 and vs Aus in 1956. Both series he was the top scorer by about 90 runs, and in both series he faced bowlers who were ranked in the top 5 at that point in time (Tayfield, Lindwall, Miller)

How come Viv in 76, especially during his last two Australia matches, England and India series isn't ahead of Ponting?

 

[Coronis]

How come Viv in 76, especially during his last two Australia matches, England and India series isn't ahead of Ponting?

Cos he isn’t. Don’t ask me, I didn’t make the ranking system. Blame Ted Dexter and whoever came up with the formula at the ICC in ‘87.

 

[Johan]

Boycott just..... Really close.

switch

 

[capt_Luffy]

switch

ed

 

[Coronis]

Interesting to see this poll result.

Whereas in the batsmen rankings done just a few months earlier, Boycott ranked 34th, and May 40th. (In 2022 Boycott was 29th and May was 46th)

 

[Johan]

Interesting to see this poll result.

Whereas in the batsmen rankings done just a few months earlier, Boycott ranked 34th, and May 40th. (In 2022 Boycott was 29th and May was 46th)

seeing how they both came below guys like Kohli, Williamson and De Villiers, a tad underrated for both but more evident to the naked eye for Geoffrey.

 

[Coronis]

seeing how they both came below guys like Kohli, Williamson and De Villiers, a tad underrated for both but more evident to the naked eye for Geoffrey.

Its interesting how often the 1v1 poll results diverge and how opinions can quickly seem to shift here - mainly on players a bit below that top level. Obviously theres an element of differing amounts of votes and which particular members are voting, but nonetheless, very interesting.

 

[Johan]

Its interesting how often the 1v1 poll results diverge and how opinions can quickly seem to shift here - mainly on players a bit below that top level. Obviously theres an element of differing amounts of votes and which particular members are voting, but nonetheless, very interesting.

Yeah, very interesting, I guess it's a result of people who are a part of say, Boycott vs De Villiers thread are naturally gonna be more familiar with their actual careers and contexts to even have that discussion, rather than say in a poll where one can just go with the flow or by raw stats. Geoffrey also gets a lot of hate by people who either don't understand Cricket, or take blank accusations way too seriously.

 

[capt_Luffy]

Yeah, very interesting, I guess it's a result of people who are a part of say, Boycott vs De Villiers thread are naturally gonna be more familiar with their actual careers and contexts to even have that discussion, rather than say in a poll where one can just go with the flow or by raw stats. Geoffrey also gets a lot of hate by people who either don't understand Cricket, or take blank accusations way too seriously.

Was it personal??

 

[Johan]

Was it personal??

Not for you at all, and it's obvious who the second comment is about, Hint – the guy who always mentions the case/conviction when Boycott is praised.

 

[Johan]

Was it personal??

for example, there's a crowd on here that would critique this knock/fifty, but anyone who understands Cricket would understand the sheer value of it.

Loading…

www.espncricinfo.com

 

[BazBall21]

Very tough. May had the better peak. Boycott has better longevity and is one of the most accomplished post-war openers.

 

[Johan]

Very tough. May had the better peak. Boycott has better longevity and is one of the most accomplished post-war openers.

would opt for May by just a little bit, averaged 49 before his abscess ****ed him up which is ludricous considering yhe type of pitches he constantly got at home and in Australia.

 

[Johan]

I feel like the prospect that May "bashed" New Zealand is a bit overplayed, the 1958 Kiwi attack was definitely international level with MacGibbon/Reid/Alabaster/Cave and they were playing on some extremely wet wickets, the first match was low scoring and other than May and Cowdrey, no English Batsmen managed to cross 20 runs and the team made 221 runs in total. In the third test it rained for two days straight and wicket was unplayable and May dominated and made a hundred, only the fourth test hundred could be called a poor one but still, the bowling attack wasn't terrible and the first two knocks came on a wet and then a drenched wicket, it should count for something. I feel like it was the Kiwi batting of this era that was completely pitful.

I'd say their bowling attack for 1958 is a tier above actual minnows like 2000s Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, MacGibbon and Reid are genuinely good bowlers, Alabaster was also pretty decent for a SENA spinner and Cave in context of his achievements in the unofficial tests against Australia wasn't bad either. The runs are probably no easier than some of Windies/Indian runs of the same time.

His hundred in New Zealand, well, the attack was very bad and it could be qualified as minnow bashing, I wouldn't bother doing it though, from what I can say it was a well rated hundred in some extremely windy/swingy conditions.

 

[BazBall21]

I feel like the prospect that May "bashed" New Zealand is a bit overplayed, the 1958 Kiwi attack was definitely international level with MacGibbon/Reid/Alabaster/Cave and they were playing on some extremely wet wickets, the first match was low scoring and other than May and Cowdrey, no English Batsmen managed to cross 20 runs and the team made 221 runs in total. In the third test it rained for two days straight and wicket was unplayable and May dominated and made a hundred, only the fourth test hundred could be called a poor one but still, the bowling attack wasn't terrible and the first two knocks came on a wet and then a drenched wicket, it should count for something. I feel like it was the Kiwi batting of this era that was completely pitful.

I'd say their bowling attack for 1958 is a tier above actual minnows like 2000s Bangladesh and Zimbabwe, MacGibbon and Reid are genuinely good bowlers, Alabaster was also pretty decent for a SENA spinner and Cave in context of his achievements in the unofficial tests against Australia wasn't bad either. The runs are probably no easier than some of Windies/Indian runs of the same time.

His hundred in New Zealand, well, the attack was very bad and it could be qualified as minnow bashing, I wouldn't bother doing it though, from what I can say it was a well rated hundred in some extremely windy/swingy conditions.

Only 10% of his innings came v them and while they were a very poor team at least the games came on some very damp pitches unlike playing Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the 2000s.

 

[Johan]

Only 10% of his innings came v them and while they were a very poor team at least the games came on some very damp pitches unlike playing Bangladesh and Zimbabwe in the 2000s.

Agreed, one of his hundreds came on a wicket where it had rained for two days straight and stormed and New Zealand got absolutely bodied on those wickets by Laker and Lock. The Bowling is genuinely just not that awful where I'd dismiss such performances, MacGibbon (70 wkts @ 30) and Reid (85 wkts @ 32) are genuinely respectable bowlers, Cave when he gets his unofficial tests achievements against Australia has (51 wkts @ 34). In ny opinion, performance against test class attacks on heavily drenched wet wickets is definitely worth counting.