When There Were Kings

[honestbharani]

lol.. this thing with Murali is becoming silly now. In a way both Burgey and Migara are right and wrong on this one. Murali definitely was a very good fielder and often fielded at point and covers in ODI cricket in the early to mid/late 90s. But this is where Migara is wrong. As he became an elite spinner and got into his own as an ATG bowler, his fielding started going south. Maybe due to multiple shoulder injuries etc but throughout the noughties he was never that good in the field.

 

[Athlai]

Surprised Bradman wasn't top 3 batsman for at least 5 years?

I only go to 1945 and he retired in 1948, so he was number 1 every year he played that I measured.
Top 6 by individual
Bradman 1948 - 961
Bradman 1945 - 952
Bradman 1947 - 946
Len Hutton1954 - 945
Bradman 1946 - 942
Smith 2017 - 941

 

[cnerd123]

lol.. this thing with Murali is becoming silly now. In a way both Burgey and Migara are right and wrong on this one. Murali definitely was a very good fielder and often fielded at point and covers in ODI cricket in the early to mid/late 90s. But this is where Migara is wrong. As he became an elite spinner and got into his own as an ATG bowler, his fielding started going south. Maybe due to multiple shoulder injuries etc but throughout the noughties he was never that good in the field.

it's also age and workload. Any young talented kid worth his salt is gonna be a livewire in the field in their early days, but that's purely out of adrenaline and hunger more than any inherent fielding greatness. Once your spot in the side is established and you're going through the grind of touring, training and playing long innings/bowling loads of overs your body is going to age, your desire to sprint and dive in the outfield will drop off, and you're bound to lose the edge in your fielding. So yea pretty silly debate on both ends.

Great work compiling this data @Athlai , makes for interesting reading. Lance Gibbs really should get picked in WI ATG XIs more often. Usually gets glossed over for a full on pace attack with Sobers for spin support, or the more ***ier options in Ramdhin and Valentine

 

[Coronis]

Surprised Bradman wasn't top 3 batsman for at least 5 years?

Thats because he only did post WWII. fwiw I took a quick look at the top threes for 1900-1945 (excluding 1915-1920 and 1941-1945 where there was no change due to the wars)

Batsmen
Jack Hohbs (14)
Herbert Sutcliffe (11)
Don Bradman (10)
Wally Hammond (10)
Clem Hill (9)
Herbie Taylor (8)
Victor Trumper (8)
George Headley (6)
Tom Hayward (5)
Aubrey Faulkner (5)

Bowlers
Maurice Tate (10)
Monty Noble (10)
Jack Gregory (7)
Arthur Mailey (7)
Clarrie Grimmett (6)
Hugh Trumble (6)
Bill O’Reilly (6)
Hedley Verity (6)
Wilfred Rhodes (5)

Dunno how to see the allrounders one. (Faulkner was also there 4 times for his bowling)

Fun fact: Clem Hill was #1 8 years in this compared to Trumper at 0 years.

 

[trundler]

Seriously, what's up with the ridiculous under rating of Hill? Ashes hero, scored quickly, was around for a fair but and was a captain of note too. Literally ticks every box. I'm not sure how he was aesthetically. Wisden does mention him as an ATG leftie from memory.

 

[OverratedSanity]

I think a top 10 or even top 25 would give a more clear idea of relative competitives/top-heaviness of eras. Get on it @Athlai

 

[Coronis]

Seriously, what's up with the ridiculous under rating of Hill? Ashes hero, scored quickly, was around for a fair but and was a captain of note too. Literally ticks every box. I'm not sure how he was aesthetically. Wisden does mention him as an ATG leftie from memory.

The big average boost due to multiple factors postwar, plus having his career alongside Trumper's.